On Aug 31, 2012 9:00 AM PDT David Kim wrote: A few weeks ago, we asked you to join us in testing a few proposed balance tweaks for StarCraft II. At the time, we felt like terran performance versus zerg (at the pro level) needed some attention. You responded with a lot of testing and good feedback.
Since we began this testing, we’ve also been paying very close attention to the major tournaments around the world, and we’ve noticed that terran performance in the TvZ matchup has improved. In analyzing tournaments such as Global StarCraft II Team League, Intel Extreme Masters, and Major League Gaming, we’re no longer seeing the same balance shifts that caused us to propose changes in the first place. The most interesting tournament in this context was the IEM at gamescom 2012 in Cologne, Germany, where we saw players such as Kas and MVP make use of Ravens in ways that held a lot of potential.
We feel that at this time, we should give players more opportunities to fully explore the slowly-shifting meta-game before we change the balance of the game. We’re seeing a lot more players starting to explore Ravens, and we’d like to see exactly how that goes before making any decisions on balance. The TvZ win ratio has somewhat shifted toward terran, calling a nerf to creep tumor into question.
This is the first time that we’ve planned for an adjustment, and then observed a change in the meta-game that could impact our decision. That doesn’t lead us to the conclusion that there is nothing that needs to be adjusted, but rather, it’s a chance for us to carefully consider other things. When we see that balance is changing on its own, we prefer to continue monitoring the situation and see where the performance of the different matchups settles before we step in.
Overall, the balance we’re seeing at the tournament level looks pretty good right now, and we will continue to watch the meta-game closely, and read your suggestions.
I mean, I guess it's kind of true. Terran players are starting to figure things out again. But the ridiculous ease with which creep is able o be spread and Ravens being sub par, no matter how hard you try to argue against it, needs to be addressed still, IMO
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
I will never have the APM to control blink stalkers like Hero or MC, but I keep running into that brick wall in PvP. Don't worry, I have faith in you and that your ability to get enough APM to beat your opponents.
Here's the problem with this. When DKim made the Queen range/overlord speed patch TvZ was at the most balanced it had been in a long time. I believe the winrates were 51%/49% or something like that - in any case it was extremely close at the highest levels. Why on earth was that change made if the balance was looking great? Especially when it was an absolutely massive change, completely buffing both Zerg's scouting ability and defensive/macro unit (worth noting: I do think overlord speed was a fine buff, but both at once was absurd - especially when you talk about a "slowly developing game" as Kim does above).
I don't really have the authority to comment on if TvZ is balanced now, but one thing is for sure, as a spectator of TvZ matches in tournaments it has become a lot more boring to watch. The proposed Raven patch wasn't going to fix the 10 minute early game snore-fest TvZ has become, and all this latest situation report has convinced me of is Blizzard just makes up stuff as they go along - if statistics actually mattered to them they wouldn't have patched queens in the first place.
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
It takes one action to use a seeker missile, and mech doesn't take APM fyi... Not sure if you remember the guy who literally chooses what to use every action on (GoOdy)
Terran is doing fine just look at Kas and Taeja DKim: Hmmm, well if you look at it that way!
I feel for the terran players though. I mean protoss and zerg have both had major whining campaigns being succesful in either nerfs to terran or buffs to their respective races.
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
Yup, this is exactly how Blizzard balances this game. They just look at tournament results see which race is winning and stop them from winning.
On September 01 2012 01:07 winthrop wrote: lol. why dont give zerg players time to show full potential. also did you notice the wcs race distribution?
You mean WCS Korea? That's mostly P though, unrelated to ZvT balance.
He means in NA and EU(though EU had some pretty good terrans in the upper brackets). But those events have a lot of lead in and many of the best terrans were knocked out over a month ago, when terrans were really getting worked over. We will have to watch the next GSL and NASL so really see how it pans out.
We feel that at this time, we should give players more opportunities to fully explore the slowly-shifting meta-game before we change the balance of the game.
Wish they just did this all the time.. players, most of the time will figure out ways to deal with any problems and on some occasions Blizzard should have just waited longer before making changes
Love it. I know it will lead to an absolute shitstorm of Terran whine; nonetheless, Kim speaks the truth -- Terrans are competing (and winning) at the highest levels.
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
I'm sure he could write you a book on the various things they do and look at to come to conclusions, but it's not worth it if he's just making a 2-minute update. Simmer down.
IEM- 3/4 zerg finalists. MVP won against foreigners. WCS- enough said Korea- P has always been good and the metagame shifting benefits them I guess MLG- Zerg champion ( not to say that was balance related Leenock played beast but still)
Racial balance in tournaments is a terrible way of looking at balance in general. They clearly just don't want to see any terrans playing on the ladder if they continue with this way of "balancing". Its pretty funny how when terrans are underpowered its ok bc the metagame is shifting, but when it comes to a different race having trouble they either baby them and show them what to do or nerf terran. The second a 2 base thor timing from a foreigner vs cross server Korean game comes out a giant nerf making the Thor obsolete in TvP comes. Or one tournament of blue flame hellions is enough to warrant a giant nerf. And depending on the day a bunker or barracks builds too fast or too slow.
In both TvP and TvZ, one misclick even when you are mechanically stronger and ahead can cost the game..its OK when you are on the level of IMMVP, but everybody else its unreasonable to expect this type of play. I guess David Kim doesn't think so.
We feel that at this time, we should give players more opportunities to fully explore the slowly-shifting meta-game before we change the balance of the game.
Wish they just did this all the time.. players, most of the time will figure out ways to deal with any problems and on some occasions Blizzard should have just waited longer before making changes
They are slowing catching on. Blizzard has come a long way since the release of SC2. The maps alone are a huge improvement. We should focus on making better maps and keep the balance changes off the table for a while.
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
Did you even read it? They never said it was perfect, they said they are going to wait to see how to meta-game evolves after seeing the potential use for ravens. They still could buff them or nerf creep, but they don't want to rush things.
Being patient and considerate is amateurish to you? Does that mean you are in favour of knee-jerk balance changes then?
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
I will never have the AMP to control blink stalkers like Hero or MC, but I keep running into that brick wall in PvP. Don't worry, I have faith in you and that your ability to get enough AMP to beat your opponents.
Adenosine Mono-Phosphate? You must mean either ATP (energy) or APM (movements). But I'm not so sure, given that that typo happened twice in a row...
I think that the creep nerf is still necessary, as the game is, even if possibly fair in TvZ, kind of lacking in an interesting early and mid-game. And, like others have pointed out, basing balance on the status of TaeJa's and MVP's conditions is suspect. The "interest" factor also applies to the raven changes, IMO.
Terrans used ravens after getting 5 bases on Metro...COOL Ofc that means every map in tourney and ladder pool allows them to get 4+ bases...creep is still a problem, just not on some maps. I don't think it's that much of an issue but the logic they use is always full of fucking shit.
We feel that at this time, we should give players more opportunities to fully explore the slowly-shifting meta-game before we change the balance of the game.
Wish they just did this all the time.. players, most of the time will figure out ways to deal with any problems and on some occasions Blizzard should have just waited longer before making changes
This game especially toss balance was pretty dire in the fall of last year. I think in hindsight we're being gracious but it wasn't a very competitive or compelling game at the pro-level for significant portions of last year. Now after the map changes and the balance tweaks we're reaching an equilibrium where on their day no one race is really expected to dominate or more likely to win. Unfortunately, some of the fundamental design seems terrible and the gameplay stale, but this game is significantly more competitive than it was before Bliz stepped in.
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
Did you even read it? They never said it was perfect, they said they are going to wait to see how to meta-game evolves after seeing the potential use for ravens. They still could buff them or nerf creep, but they don't want to rush things.
Then why did they give Queens +2 range? Don't you realize their hilarious double standards in regard to this?
People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
On September 01 2012 01:23 xrapture wrote: Guess he didn't watch any of the Vortix games.
He did really well for a first time showing on the big stage. We will have to see how much better he does against a stronger player pool, but all and all he did very well.
Wonder why not let the meta game work itself out before reaper, tank, barracks, hellion, ghost nerf. Although, it's pretty cool to be able to play a race that only real men (Thorzain) and Koreans can win with.
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
We feel that at this time, we should give players more opportunities to fully explore the slowly-shifting meta-game before we change the balance of the game.
Wish they just did this all the time.. players, most of the time will figure out ways to deal with any problems and on some occasions Blizzard should have just waited longer before making changes
This, exactly.
All I ask is for some consistency, really. I would prefer the wait for players to figure things out approach but if you are going to throw buffs and nerfs around then you might as well keep that going. Pick a lane and stick with it.
First I play 10 ladder games, meet 1 terran who actually was just losing games on purpose then I read this.
I understand that their view when they see terran somewhat adapting to the situation, however, for a average terran like me I can see clearly the lack of terrans on ladder each time I play. On ladder my opponents are 20% T / 40% P / 40% Z according to Sc2gears.
I understand that Kas and MVP makes it look easy, however, for majority of terrans it's a struggle.
And last but not least it's great to see that David Kim sees that Raven has potential. Since that's the only word to describe Raven, a unit with a lot of potential and that's it.
It's okay, all you need to do is constantly harass 2 locations while keeping your money low and pushing the creep back, that is if you get to play in a huge map such as metropolis or atlantis and get away with greed! It's a revolutionary change in the meta game, ehehehehe, freaking MVP beating 2nd/3rd tier zergs with ravens, ehehehe revolutionary indeed!! On a second note, WHO didn't expect that? Terran being buffed?Ha, are you god damn mad?Better patch zerg again after virtually no PTR, because only terran makes them feel like they should give more time for players "to fully explore the slowly-shifting meta-game"
david kim literally has to be the worst person for the job... the one time wol gets balanced he buffs queens for literaly no reason and now has no balls to say they were wrong...
I am totally stoked to hear them say that they want to be very patient and give the meta game a chance to shift before patching, it's how it should be. I can understand terrans feeling hard done by because this obviously hasn't been their M.O for a lot of past changes, but I think it's a step in the right direction now
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
I dont agree with the TvZ was a great match up prior to the +2 queen range. I have a problem with a opening that was used on every map, every time. The only question was, "how many hellions will they build". But I guess it was nice for terrans to only have to know one build for the whole match up.
I dont understand why they are fooling around such a long time about just the minor buff of giving the ravens a slightly higher speed, not like this would change the winrates at all but making it a bit easier to use ravens that already need a lot of time and money to get going. They nerfed so many major things without even a PTR that had a significant impact on the balance, but now when it comes to such a minor improvement they need to think about it for months? Also: Comments are disabled, lol.
Its too bad they didn't do this with the queen change. Either way, this change would need to happen all over again if zerg players learned not to clump their air units, but i still see motherships winning games in ZvP, so maybe were safe anyway?
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
So much bias in one post. Thanks for proving my point.
In my Opinion they do a marketing trick . At the beginning of sc2 terra was in advantage and I guess they want to do that with Zerg. The queen range + Show Spoiler +
I think they will change the position with Terran in Hots ( Zergs dominate).After some months zergs wonder why they only get nerfs and terrans get buff. finally Hots Toss will get a good buff and will dominate ( the same things with this Addon then) ect.
it is most likly crap what I wrote but it could be a possibility to explain the strong buffs for Zerg.
On September 01 2012 01:32 Aquila- wrote: I dont understand why they are fooling around such a long time about just the minor buff of giving the ravens a slightly higher speed, not like this would change the winrates at all but making it a bit easier to use ravens that already need a lot of time and money to get going. They nerfed so many major things without even a PTR that had a significant impact on the balance, but now when it comes to such a minor improvement they need to think about it for months?
They should've been doing this before. Like the queen buff. Or observing how map changes affected balance. Or countless other cases.
It's good they're doing this now... but drawing conclusings from Mvp winning games vs foreigners that are obviously far inferior players is pretty silly.
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
I dont agree with the TvZ was a great match up prior to the +2 queen range. I have a problem with a opening that was used on every map, every time. The only question was, "how many hellions will they build". But I guess it was nice for terrans to only have to know one build for the whole match up.
I hope you realize how ironic this statement is when talking about Zerg. And regardless of your opinion about pre-Queen buff TvZ, it was widely recognized at the most successful match-up in SC2. Now a lot of people compare it to ZvP... which unfortunately says a lot.
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
Except they had more than enough time for testing and their evaluation of IEM's games is atrocious at best, I watched every IEM replay involving MVP, his builds were extremely well thought-out, down to the T, his opponents were simply put subpar zergs, much much worse players than MVP, yet all that DKim could take from that is "game is fine, mvp wins, you see?"Why no PTR for a zerg buff that the majority DISAGREES with and when it comes to terran even when the majority AGREES with the change, it doesn't go through? It's laughable, queen range wasn't welcome, raven change was, blizzard doesn't care, probably thinking of new variations of destructible rocks.
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
I think he was rather talking about the way Mvp used Ravens. However, in my opinion the only reason for Ravens being strong was Metropolis.
On September 01 2012 01:29 the_business_og wrote: david kim literally has to be the worst person for the job... the one time wol gets balanced he buffs queens for literaly no reason and now has no balls to say they were wrong...
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
So much bias in one post. Thanks for proving my point.
Yep, I guess even pros Zergs stating that Queen buff was unnecessary and made Zerg favored in ZvT are biased towards Terran. Makes a lot of sense.
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
I dont agree with the TvZ was a great match up prior to the +2 queen range. I have a problem with a opening that was used on every map, every time. The only question was, "how many hellions will they build". But I guess it was nice for terrans to only have to know one build for the whole match up.
I hope you realize how ironic this statement is when talking about Zerg. And regardless of your opinion about pre-Queen buff TvZ, it was widely recognized at the most successful match-up in SC2. Now a lot of people compare it to ZvP... which unfortunately says a lot.
Considering how pure 2base timings are so rare in TvZ nowadays, and how rare 2base busts/pressure is rare in ZvP, i don't understand that comparison at all other than "killing zerg before hive tech is easier than killing him after hive tech".
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
So much bias in one post. Thanks for proving my point.
Yep, I guess even pros Zergs stating that Queen buff was unnecessary and made Zerg favored in ZvT are biased towards Terran. Makes a lot of sense.
Who are these pro-zergs? I need to see these quotes.
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
I dont agree with the TvZ was a great match up prior to the +2 queen range. I have a problem with a opening that was used on every map, every time. The only question was, "how many hellions will they build". But I guess it was nice for terrans to only have to know one build for the whole match up.
I hope you realize how ironic this statement is when talking about Zerg. And regardless of your opinion about pre-Queen buff TvZ, it was widely recognized at the most successful match-up in SC2. Now a lot of people compare it to ZvP... which unfortunately says a lot.
Considering how pure 2base timings are so rare in TvZ nowadays, and how rare 2base busts/pressure is rare in ZvP, i don't understand that comparison at all other than "killing zerg before hive tech is easier than killing him after hive tech".
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
I dont agree with the TvZ was a great match up prior to the +2 queen range. I have a problem with a opening that was used on every map, every time. The only question was, "how many hellions will they build". But I guess it was nice for terrans to only have to know one build for the whole match up.
An opener that works on every map, every time? Are you talking about the 6 queen opener or what?
I hope you realise how hilariously ironic everything you just said is
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
So much bias in one post. Thanks for proving my point.
Yep, I guess even pros Zergs stating that Queen buff was unnecessary and made Zerg favored in ZvT are biased towards Terran. Makes a lot of sense.
Who are these pro-zergs? I need to see these quotes.
I think DRG and Symbol stated something similar to those lines in interviews.. someone will have to dig it up =\
On September 01 2012 01:41 tuho12345 wrote: nerf BL a lil bit I'll be happy. Or may be just nerf the corruptor.
I guess you mean infestor? Corruptor are the things that protect BL from flying stuff before becoming BL themselves and are just flying junk otherwise Infestors are the thingies that kill everything.
On September 01 2012 01:34 Teoita wrote: How about you all shut the fuck up and stop whining. All they said is "let's wait some more", not NO TERRAN BUFFS EVER FU ALL.
Besides if we go by tournament results, one could also point out that Terran will be the most represented race in Code S for example...
lol what a sick logic bro,To be represented in Code S doesn't mean they all win zerg to get code S spot.
It's great to see that Blizzard is keeping such a close eye also on their own WCS. So far during the continental finals we had 45 Protoss, 23 Terrans and 52 Zergs left. So far 7 Protoss, 3 Terrans and 10 Zergs has qualified for the WCS.
wow this is so dumb, it sounds like they watched IEM and decided "welp, play like mvp". I saw most of those games, and he probably would have lost more if the zergs build some spines to defend the hellion harrass. Not only that, but top 4 consisted of 3 zergs and MVP. MVP being the best player in the world, the three zergs being random up and coming foreigners.... .
its just the thing that zerg is in my opnion soo much easier to play with lower apm and also its so much easier to fungal a army than to spread and micro while being attacked TT ( mid master terran)
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
I think he was rather talking about the way Mvp used Ravens. However, in my opinion the only reason for Ravens being strong was Metropolis.
Agree. Mvp managing to get Ravens on Metropolis while outplaying inferior opponents (including Nestea) in midgame hardly says anything about Raven's viability on any map between equally skilled opponents. Good luck getting a Raven fleet on Antiga.
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
I dont agree with the TvZ was a great match up prior to the +2 queen range. I have a problem with a opening that was used on every map, every time. The only question was, "how many hellions will they build". But I guess it was nice for terrans to only have to know one build for the whole match up.
An opener that works on every map, every time? Are you talking about the 6 queen opener or what?
I hope you realise how hilariously ironic everything you just said is
On September 01 2012 01:47 AzBozz wrote: its just the thing that zerg is in my opnion soo much easier to play with lower apm and also its so much easier to fungal a army than to spread and micro while being attacked TT ( mid master terran)
No one cares about Mid master terran opinions... Mid master anything is bad. This is why they only use pro tournaments as statistics.
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
I dont agree with the TvZ was a great match up prior to the +2 queen range. I have a problem with a opening that was used on every map, every time. The only question was, "how many hellions will they build". But I guess it was nice for terrans to only have to know one build for the whole match up.
An opener that works on every map, every time? Are you talking about the 6 queen opener or what?
I hope you realise how hilariously ironic everything you just said is
But that ended pretty quickly. Now we see 4 queen builds with earlier pools coming back into style(MLG had tons of this) and we will see other styles come out as well.
On September 01 2012 01:16 xrapture wrote: He truly is clueless. Mvp and Bomber beat some fucking foreigners at IEM and it proves TvZ is balanced? What a joke.
And I'm guessing he didn't even bother to watch MLG.
Those same "f-ing foreigners at IEM" managed to beat a few of the Koreans too. fOrGG lost to Vortix 3-0, for example....
I predict a Raven nerf incoming, believe it or not. Mvp's gonna win the next GSL (again... :-D) against Jaedong, specfically use Ravens, and Blizz is gonna nerf 'em. It's a suspicious trend for the great LG-IM Terran....
Plus, it also seems to me that whenever Terrans figure out how to use one or more of their units, they get nerfed rather dramatically, like the Ghost. I hope it's not the same once Sky Terran becomes better understood and more played.
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
So much bias in one post. Thanks for proving my point.
Yep, I guess even pros Zergs stating that Queen buff was unnecessary and made Zerg favored in ZvT are biased towards Terran. Makes a lot of sense.
Who are these pro-zergs? I need to see these quotes.
I think DRG and Symbol stated something similar to those lines in interviews.. someone will have to dig it up =\
Drg stated that it makes zerg easier and it was bad for him because now ledare Zergs eill look as Good as him;)
Putting all balance issues aside, I think the Queen range-buff made most of the pro-TvZs incredibly boring.
I used to love watching TvZs that were a back and forth, like: Terran goes Hellions for map-control and threatening the Zerg, maybe some drops, then Zerg goes Mutas - takes map-control and harrasses constantly, Ling runbys and all that good stuff, then a smooth transition into lategame...
Nowadays it's most of the time just a sit-and-wait till all are maxed out, then 1 fight...gg...
Since I'm only a noob I'm not sure if this is true, but IMO this game needs "threats" like Hellions used to be, or Mutas when people still used them, because it forces both parties to stay active with their units or invest into static defenses. And it seems like all those "threats" are gone now, which makes it less and less entertaining.
I guess I'll better watch the International now, cuz Chinese Dota is f-ing awesome
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
I dont agree with the TvZ was a great match up prior to the +2 queen range. I have a problem with a opening that was used on every map, every time. The only question was, "how many hellions will they build". But I guess it was nice for terrans to only have to know one build for the whole match up.
An opener that works on every map, every time? Are you talking about the 6 queen opener or what?
I hope you realise how hilariously ironic everything you just said is
But that ended pretty quickly. Now we see 4 queen builds with earlier pools coming back into style(MLG had tons of this) and we will see other styles come out as well.
Is the 6 queen opener not a stable build that can be used in every single map? Yes or no? If you wanna use the arguement just presented then Terran used other strategies aswell, sometimes it was cloak banshee, 2 rax and other early game stuff. But i guess we shoudent use that argument, because it makes your posting fall apart even more Moving on!
On September 01 2012 01:47 AzBozz wrote: its just the thing that zerg is in my opnion soo much easier to play with lower apm and also its so much easier to fungal a army than to spread and micro while being attacked TT ( mid master terran)
No one cares about Mid master terran opinions... Mid master anything is bad. This is why they only use pro tournaments as statistics.
then soon there will be no more terrans in the lower leagues. when im laddering out of 10 games i meet one terran. and soooo many zergs .
and some that were not considered as bad: 1) corruption cd-base 2) blue flame hellion nerf 3) supply depot before rax 4) archon range +1/ massive-attribute
Now players seem to have adjusted to Blizzard's changes so that most matchups are pretty even and skill-based results.
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
I dont agree with the TvZ was a great match up prior to the +2 queen range. I have a problem with a opening that was used on every map, every time. The only question was, "how many hellions will they build". But I guess it was nice for terrans to only have to know one build for the whole match up.
An opener that works on every map, every time? Are you talking about the 6 queen opener or what?
I hope you realise how hilariously ironic everything you just said is
But that ended pretty quickly. Now we see 4 queen builds with earlier pools coming back into style(MLG had tons of this) and we will see other styles come out as well.
Is the 6 queen opener not a stable build that can be used in every single map? Yes or no? If you wanna use the arguement just presented then Terran used other strategies aswell, sometimes it was cloak banshee, 2 rax and other early game stuff. But i guess we shoudent use that argument, because it makes your posting fall apart even more Moving on!
From my understanding, the 6 queen opening has no ability to punish a terran if he is greedy, which is why people switched to 4 queens and an early pool. I think Liquid "I'll show you the meaning of greed" Teaja highlighted this during the IPTL finals when he was rushing to 3 and 4 command centers.
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
I dont agree with the TvZ was a great match up prior to the +2 queen range. I have a problem with a opening that was used on every map, every time. The only question was, "how many hellions will they build". But I guess it was nice for terrans to only have to know one build for the whole match up.
An opener that works on every map, every time? Are you talking about the 6 queen opener or what?
I hope you realise how hilariously ironic everything you just said is
But that ended pretty quickly. Now we see 4 queen builds with earlier pools coming back into style(MLG had tons of this) and we will see other styles come out as well.
No, fast third / 6 Queens openings are still used but old agressive Mutalisks-based styles are still viable (e. g. Leenock play) despite countless Zergs claiming the contrary and using this fallacy as an evidence that they need to be able to go 11 minuts Hive while skipping units during the first minuts of the game.
On September 01 2012 01:54 Schlendrian wrote: Putting all balance issues aside, I think the Queen range-buff made most of the pro-TvZs incredibly boring.
I used to love watching TvZs that were a back and forth, like: Terran goes Hellions for map-control and threatening the Zerg, maybe some drops, then Zerg goes Mutas - takes map-control and harrasses constantly, Ling runbys and all that good stuff, then a smooth transition into lategame...
Nowadays it's most of the time just a sit-and-wait till all are maxed out, then 1 fight...gg...
Since I'm only a noob I'm not sure if this is true, but IMO this game needs "threats" like Hellions used to be, or Mutas when people still used them, because it forces both parties to stay active with their units or invest into static defenses. And it seems like all those "threats" are gone now, which makes it less and less entertaining.
I guess I'll better watch the International now, cuz Chinese Dota is f-ing awesome
I agree with you pretty much, except mutas aren't "bad'. I remember I recently read that ZvT mutas have a higher winrate than infestors in the GSL or something...probably because with mutas you'll take minimal damage from drops.
Anyways, can someone explain me how IM-Nestea is a "lesser foreigner zerg" that "MVP beat because he was way better"? Someone on the first or second page linked the video from IEM of MVP destroying Nestea with a nice raven flank...
On September 01 2012 01:28 Rokoz wrote: First I play 10 ladder games, meet 1 terran who actually was just losing games on purpose then I read this.
I understand that their view when they see terran somewhat adapting to the situation, however, for a average terran like me I can see clearly the lack of terrans on ladder each time I play. On ladder my opponents are 20% T / 40% P / 40% Z according to Sc2gears.
I understand that Kas and MVP makes it look easy, however, for majority of terrans it's a struggle.
And last but not least it's great to see that David Kim sees that Raven has potential. Since that's the only word to describe Raven, a unit with a lot of potential and that's it.
I'm pretty sure Blizzard believes they are fixing that difficulty problem with all the mech units in heart of the swarm since they said they were doing it to add an easier than bio playstyle like the other races have.
On September 01 2012 01:47 AzBozz wrote: its just the thing that zerg is in my opnion soo much easier to play with lower apm and also its so much easier to fungal a army than to spread and micro while being attacked TT ( mid master terran)
No one cares about Mid master terran opinions... Mid master anything is bad. This is why they only use pro tournaments as statistics.
Indeed. Blizzard logic is very powerful.
Back in the very first GSL (GSL open), fruitdealer grab the champion from a bunch of highly trained KR terrans, David said T imba, they are everywhere among the top 8 though the winner is Z.
Now, MVP trying hard and grab the champion from a relatively low level foreign tournament (no offense here) coz we all knew it is impossible for him to win any money from KR, with surrounded by a bunch of poorly trained Zerg foreigners (still no offense here, just imagine how these player do when they play on KR GM ladder) and David says, LOOK, T is the champion, terran is just fine.
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
I think he was rather talking about the way Mvp used Ravens. However, in my opinion the only reason for Ravens being strong was Metropolis.
Agree. Mvp managing to get Ravens on Metropolis while outplaying inferior opponents (including Nestea) in midgame hardly says anything about Raven's viability on any map between equally skilled opponents. Good luck getting a Raven fleet on Antiga.
That's the point. You don't need to build raven on antiga, control the center, don't allow him to get a 4th base and just win the game.
Sigh. I play Toss but ZvT used to be the best matchup to watch in tournaments. Now it's... well, it's still ok, but not nearly as good as it used to be. Since it's so much harder for Terrans to be aggressive mid game and Zergs just macro up, the first 15 minutes of most ZvTs is extremely boring.
On September 01 2012 01:54 Schlendrian wrote: Putting all balance issues aside, I think the Queen range-buff made most of the pro-TvZs incredibly boring.
I used to love watching TvZs that were a back and forth, like: Terran goes Hellions for map-control and threatening the Zerg, maybe some drops, then Zerg goes Mutas - takes map-control and harrasses constantly, Ling runbys and all that good stuff, then a smooth transition into lategame...
Nowadays it's most of the time just a sit-and-wait till all are maxed out, then 1 fight...gg...
Since I'm only a noob I'm not sure if this is true, but IMO this game needs "threats" like Hellions used to be, or Mutas when people still used them, because it forces both parties to stay active with their units or invest into static defenses. And it seems like all those "threats" are gone now, which makes it less and less entertaining.
I guess I'll better watch the International now, cuz Chinese Dota is f-ing awesome
I agree with you pretty much, except mutas aren't "bad'. I remember I recently read that ZvT mutas have a higher winrate than infestors in the GSL or something...probably because with mutas you'll take minimal damage from drops.
Anyways, can someone explain me how IM-Nestea is a "lesser foreigner zerg" that "MVP beat because he was way better"? Someone on the first or second page linked the video from IEM of MVP destroying Nestea with a nice raven flank...
Just as a point of fact, Mvp has like a 90% winrated against Nestea specifically. Since they practice together, and given their playstyles, it's impossible for NesTea to beat him. If you check out ZvT, NesTea's weakest matchup, and you remove all his games vs Mvp from it, suddenly it's as strong as his other matchups.
That being said, Mvp is a mad nerd baller. Even if Terran was legitimately weaker than other races he'd still win, because he's the greatest Sc2 player alive.
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
I dont agree with the TvZ was a great match up prior to the +2 queen range. I have a problem with a opening that was used on every map, every time. The only question was, "how many hellions will they build". But I guess it was nice for terrans to only have to know one build for the whole match up.
An opener that works on every map, every time? Are you talking about the 6 queen opener or what?
I hope you realise how hilariously ironic everything you just said is
But that ended pretty quickly. Now we see 4 queen builds with earlier pools coming back into style(MLG had tons of this) and we will see other styles come out as well.
Is the 6 queen opener not a stable build that can be used in every single map? Yes or no? If you wanna use the arguement just presented then Terran used other strategies aswell, sometimes it was cloak banshee, 2 rax and other early game stuff. But i guess we shoudent use that argument, because it makes your posting fall apart even more Moving on!
From my understanding, the 6 queen opening has no ability to punish a terran if he is greedy
Fortunately enough Zergs do not need to punish Terran greed because they can rush Hive and get their ultimate armies way faster than Terrans can.
On September 01 2012 01:47 AzBozz wrote: its just the thing that zerg is in my opnion soo much easier to play with lower apm and also its so much easier to fungal a army than to spread and micro while being attacked TT ( mid master terran)
No one cares about Mid master terran opinions... Mid master anything is bad. This is why they only use pro tournaments as statistics.
Indeed. Blizzard logic is very powerful.
Back in the very first GSL (GSL open), fruitdealer grab the champion from a bunch of highly trained KR terrans, David said T imba, they are everywhere among the top 8 though the winner is Z.
Now, MVP trying hard and grab the champion from a relatively low level foreign tournament (no offense here) coz we all knew it is impossible for him to win any money from KR, with surrounded by a bunch of poorly trained Zerg foreigners (still no offense here, just imagine how these player do when they play on KR GM ladder) and David says, LOOK, T is the champion, terran is just fine.
Sad to say this is the length Blizzard will go to justify keeping things the way they are. They're either lazy, inept, or probably both.
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
I dont agree with the TvZ was a great match up prior to the +2 queen range. I have a problem with a opening that was used on every map, every time. The only question was, "how many hellions will they build". But I guess it was nice for terrans to only have to know one build for the whole match up.
That's like hating on zerg for going hatch first ZvT and toss for going FFE PvZ(or maybe rather for zergs going 3 hatch before gas ZvP against FFE). It's an opening with a shitton of followups.
We feel that at this time, we should give players more opportunities to fully explore the slowly-shifting meta-game before we change the balance of the game.
Wish they just did this all the time.. players, most of the time will figure out ways to deal with any problems and on some occasions Blizzard should have just waited longer before making changes
Yep. I feel like they jumped the gun on many, many patches. Maybe even the most needed one too, reapers.
As a high Masters Terran, this season, according to SC2 gears, I have played nearly as many games against Zerg than Terran and Protoss combined: 81, 46 and 39 respectively. All of my friends say the same exact thing
On September 01 2012 01:47 AzBozz wrote: its just the thing that zerg is in my opnion soo much easier to play with lower apm and also its so much easier to fungal a army than to spread and micro while being attacked TT ( mid master terran)
No one cares about Mid master terran opinions... Mid master anything is bad. This is why they only use pro tournaments as statistics.
then soon there will be no more terrans in the lower leagues. when im laddering out of 10 games i meet one terran. and soooo many zergs .
Not really. As the "lower leagues" disappear they'll actually all be replaced by better players. It's an inevitability.
On September 01 2012 01:13 DT.Damage wrote: rofl.....thanks taeja thx mvp for being the best players...youre the reasons we get nerfed!
lol MVP was the main reason for ages and Taeja has taken over that job As a Protoss I find it funny but yah... even the worse Terrans have figured it out since the initial patch at least
On September 01 2012 02:02 C0ntrast wrote: why am i feeling like blizzard has no clue in terms of balancing?
"Lemme take a look at 3 Tournaments, oh T is winning against Z, everything is k again. bye."
just wow, i hope HotS isn't going to be such a blunder as WoL was in the beginning.
They used those results as examples, not as their only source of data. Why are you making thing up?
And you know what, I just want to give Blizzard some credit here: Although WoL was unbalanced at first, they realized this and balanced it. Blizzard cares a lot about making the game balanced. They may not be perfect, and they may make mistakes, but they're trying and listening to the community and watching pro games. Any criticism I have for them is predicated on "first, thank you for trying. here's how I think you can do better"
So when Thors had no energy, and thorzain made a new strategy with them it had to be instantly patched but now it is okay to wait for the meta game to balance itself. I don't understand their logic.
On September 01 2012 02:06 Jimmy Raynor wrote: So when Thors had no energy, and thorzain made a new strategy with them it had to be instantly patched but now it is okay to wait for the meta game to balance itself. I don't understand their logic.
There is no logic to be understood. They're finally giving pros a chance to adapt to meta game shifts before knee-jerk patching. It's unfortunate they waited until after the queen buff.
On September 01 2012 02:05 xrapture wrote: As a high Masters Terran, this season, according to SC2 gears, I have played nearly as many games against Zerg than Terran and Protoss combined: 81, 46 and 39 respectively. All of my friends say the same exact thing
This matches my personal experience, I encounter almost as many Z as T and P combined.
On September 01 2012 02:05 xrapture wrote: As a high Masters Terran, this season, according to SC2 gears, I have played nearly as many games against Zerg than Terran and Protoss combined: 81, 46 and 39 respectively. All of my friends say the same exact thing
This matches my personal experience, I encounter almost as many Z as T and P combined.
down in here in low masters the racial setup is a bit more balanced. I'd say I see all races about evenly, with a little bit less terran than the other 2 but not much. Haven't seen a random player in like over a month.
I don't get how they can say that when some games are so much one sided.. It's not even about win rates, but sometimes TVZ is just terran playing right, and getting swarmed by bigger armies than his until he's dead even if he trades (very) well and is ahead on bases (Like Revival vs MKP at MLG). Not even talking about games like Maru vs Shine this morning, where the said revolutionary MVP mech build just got destroyed by ONE roach drop.. When playing random it just doesn't feel right how I can beat master players as zerg but still struggle against diamond zerg as terran, when my play isn't that bad (at least way better than my "master" zerg).
So blizzard finally does what so many people wanted: gives the meta game a chance to settle down, gives the pros a chance to figure things out, and everyone throws a fit? It really feels like no matter what blizzard does they can't please everyone, and the displeased whiners will always be the loudest.
On September 01 2012 02:13 hunts wrote: So blizzard finally does what so many people wanted: gives the meta game a chance to settle down, gives the pros a chance to figure things out, and everyone throws a fit? It really feels like no matter what blizzard does they can't please everyone, and the displeased whiners will always be the loudest.
Love how you dismiss the part about how they should have done this way earlier, and not post-Queen buff.
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
I dont agree with the TvZ was a great match up prior to the +2 queen range. I have a problem with a opening that was used on every map, every time. The only question was, "how many hellions will they build". But I guess it was nice for terrans to only have to know one build for the whole match up.
An opener that works on every map, every time? Are you talking about the 6 queen opener or what?
I hope you realise how hilariously ironic everything you just said is
But that ended pretty quickly. Now we see 4 queen builds with earlier pools coming back into style(MLG had tons of this) and we will see other styles come out as well.
Is the 6 queen opener not a stable build that can be used in every single map? Yes or no? If you wanna use the arguement just presented then Terran used other strategies aswell, sometimes it was cloak banshee, 2 rax and other early game stuff. But i guess we shoudent use that argument, because it makes your posting fall apart even more Moving on!
From my understanding, the 6 queen opening has no ability to punish a terran if he is greedy
Fortunately enough Zergs do not need to punish Terran greed because they can rush Hive and get their ultimate armies way faster than Terrans can.
It don’t think that is how it works. Maybe in your games where you cannot handle getting a such a robust terran economy so quickly.
On September 01 2012 02:13 hunts wrote: So blizzard finally does what so many people wanted: gives the meta game a chance to settle down, gives the pros a chance to figure things out, and everyone throws a fit? It really feels like no matter what blizzard does they can't please everyone, and the displeased whiners will always be the loudest.
I'd have appreciated if they had done that prior to a horrible patch that really needs addressing(or reverting). And personally I am quite concerned that the reason they are holding their hands is that a few players(one of them playing against worse players) are doing really well while everyone else isn't.
Cool. When it was a zerg buff, it took them a few days to put it in (completely screwing up the meta game) and took 2-3 months for them to even respond that there was possibly a problem.
When MVP/Taeja does well at like 1-2 tournaments, against inferior players on a specific map, they pull back all plans and say "let the metagame develop"
I don't even care about the buffs. I just want to be treated fairly. This is so stupid.
On September 01 2012 02:13 hunts wrote: So blizzard finally does what so many people wanted: gives the meta game a chance to settle down, gives the pros a chance to figure things out, and everyone throws a fit? It really feels like no matter what blizzard does they can't please everyone, and the displeased whiners will always be the loudest.
I think, to some extent, people are angry it took them this long to figure out waiting for the meta to adjust is the right thing to do. Honestly, the anger here seems to be more residual anger about the weirdness of a Zerg buff when TvZ was almost a perfectly balanced matchup.
On September 01 2012 02:18 Chaggi wrote: Cool. When it was a zerg buff, it took them a few days to put it in (completely screwing up the meta game) and took 2-3 months for them to even respond that there was possibly a problem.
When MVP/Taeja does well at like 1-2 tournaments, against inferior players on a specific map, they pull back all plans and say "let the metagame develop"
I don't even care about the buffs. I just want to be treated fairly. This is so stupid.
you dont get to be treated fairly when you've had preferable treatment for the best part of 2 years
On September 01 2012 02:13 hunts wrote: So blizzard finally does what so many people wanted: gives the meta game a chance to settle down, gives the pros a chance to figure things out, and everyone throws a fit? It really feels like no matter what blizzard does they can't please everyone, and the displeased whiners will always be the loudest.
I think, to some extent, people are angry it took them this long to figure out waiting for the meta to adjust is the right thing to do. Honestly, the anger here seems to be more residual anger about the weirdness of a Zerg buff when TvZ was almost a perfectly balanced matchup.
I'm angry that it's instant reaction terran nerf while they go for a wait and see approach with zergs.
How come they never talked about DRG NEVER HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH HELLIONS PRE-PATCH? They reference Mvp for the ravens...fucking blizzard. Such a joke
blizzard should always try and error on the side of making no changes and letting pros adjust/adapt/improve. I wholeheartedly agree with this decision.
I hate the raven as a terran. If you have it selected while you have your army marine/marauders selected and you try to stim, nothing happens. Its extremely frustrating. Just patching that would be hugely beneficial.
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
I dont agree with the TvZ was a great match up prior to the +2 queen range. I have a problem with a opening that was used on every map, every time. The only question was, "how many hellions will they build". But I guess it was nice for terrans to only have to know one build for the whole match up.
An opener that works on every map, every time? Are you talking about the 6 queen opener or what?
I hope you realise how hilariously ironic everything you just said is
But that ended pretty quickly. Now we see 4 queen builds with earlier pools coming back into style(MLG had tons of this) and we will see other styles come out as well.
Is the 6 queen opener not a stable build that can be used in every single map? Yes or no? If you wanna use the arguement just presented then Terran used other strategies aswell, sometimes it was cloak banshee, 2 rax and other early game stuff. But i guess we shoudent use that argument, because it makes your posting fall apart even more Moving on!
From my understanding, the 6 queen opening has no ability to punish a terran if he is greedy
Fortunately enough Zergs do not need to punish Terran greed because they can rush Hive and get their ultimate armies way faster than Terrans can.
It don’t think that is how it works. Maybe in your games where you cannot handle getting a such a robust terran economy so quickly.
Of course it is the way it works, in an even game Zergs can get BLs/Corruptors/Infestors before Terrans (or Protoss for that matter) can get their own ultimate compositions. Both Terrans and Protoss have to stall to reach said compositions.
On September 01 2012 02:13 hunts wrote: So blizzard finally does what so many people wanted: gives the meta game a chance to settle down, gives the pros a chance to figure things out, and everyone throws a fit? It really feels like no matter what blizzard does they can't please everyone, and the displeased whiners will always be the loudest.
Some people actually believe this - they probably are not posting because they're content to read the OP.
Some people actually only wanted this when it's good for their race. They're the people you're hearing the screaming from. It isn't that people just want to be angry, it's that it's different people who are angry - and that people who are happy have no real impetus to go post 27 times on a forum about how happy they are.
On September 01 2012 02:18 Chaggi wrote: Cool. When it was a zerg buff, it took them a few days to put it in (completely screwing up the meta game) and took 2-3 months for them to even respond that there was possibly a problem.
When MVP/Taeja does well at like 1-2 tournaments, against inferior players on a specific map, they pull back all plans and say "let the metagame develop"
I don't even care about the buffs. I just want to be treated fairly. This is so stupid.
you dont get to be treated fairly when you've had preferable treatment for the best part of 2 years
A swing and a miss. I feel bad that you actually don't understand. (and please, list the preferable treatment for the "better part of 2 years"). Do you mean the Thor nerf after 1 tournament? Or the Blue Flame Hellions after the MLG? Of course, it was apparently decided by Blizzard that the meta was already figured out and it was gonna be OP. Oh and it doesn't matter if Terran used to be strong, Blizzard has a duty to make a balanced game and they don't apply the same balance methods to different races.
On September 01 2012 02:22 nottapro wrote: I hate the raven as a terran. If you have it selected while you have your army marine/marauders selected and you try to stim, nothing happens. Its extremely frustrating. Just patching that would be hugely beneficial.
This isn't even a legit complaint...control groups completely avoid this problem.
On September 01 2012 02:22 nottapro wrote: I hate the raven as a terran. If you have it selected while you have your army marine/marauders selected and you try to stim, nothing happens. Its extremely frustrating. Just patching that would be hugely beneficial.
On September 01 2012 02:20 Sroobz wrote: How come they never talked about DRG NEVER HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH HELLIONS PRE-PATCH? They reference Mvp for the ravens...fucking blizzard. Such a joke
No zerg pro ever had problems with hellions. They were stupidly easy to defend against and while yes, it did force zerg to do a specific early game to defend or die, it's not like it's any different now (6 queen opening anyone?)
On September 01 2012 02:18 Chaggi wrote: Cool. When it was a zerg buff, it took them a few days to put it in (completely screwing up the meta game) and took 2-3 months for them to even respond that there was possibly a problem.
When MVP/Taeja does well at like 1-2 tournaments, against inferior players on a specific map, they pull back all plans and say "let the metagame develop"
I don't even care about the buffs. I just want to be treated fairly. This is so stupid.
you dont get to be treated fairly when you've had preferable treatment for the best part of 2 years
So Terran players should be punished now because Blizzard failed at the beginning of the game? Nice mentality.
On September 01 2012 02:13 hunts wrote: So blizzard finally does what so many people wanted: gives the meta game a chance to settle down, gives the pros a chance to figure things out, and everyone throws a fit? It really feels like no matter what blizzard does they can't please everyone, and the displeased whiners will always be the loudest.
Love how you dismiss the part about how they should have done this way earlier, and not post-Queen buff.
So basically ur ok with what blizz is doing but ur upset it follows a buff to a race you don't play, well that's nice. :-)
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
I think he was rather talking about the way Mvp used Ravens. However, in my opinion the only reason for Ravens being strong was Metropolis.
Agree. Mvp managing to get Ravens on Metropolis while outplaying inferior opponents (including Nestea) in midgame hardly says anything about Raven's viability on any map between equally skilled opponents. Good luck getting a Raven fleet on Antiga.
Pretty sure Antiga is considered a terran favored map given the difficulty of taking the 4th and the ease of taking the third. And oh yeah, you can hold the middle pretty easily w/ planetary and tanks.
Dustin Browder & David Kim: "We balance for 200/200 on bronze league maps. You should play like we do in the office -- with the 15 minute no rush rule."
On September 01 2012 02:22 nottapro wrote: I hate the raven as a terran. If you have it selected while you have your army marine/marauders selected and you try to stim, nothing happens. Its extremely frustrating. Just patching that would be hugely beneficial.
i hate the high tenplar for the same reason. when i am a moving my army across the whole map as every good toss should do, and then i am trying to use my guardian shield, nothing happends because of my templars. just making my sentrys to automicro themselves would be hugely beneficial.
On September 01 2012 02:18 Chaggi wrote: Cool. When it was a zerg buff, it took them a few days to put it in (completely screwing up the meta game) and took 2-3 months for them to even respond that there was possibly a problem.
When MVP/Taeja does well at like 1-2 tournaments, against inferior players on a specific map, they pull back all plans and say "let the metagame develop"
I don't even care about the buffs. I just want to be treated fairly. This is so stupid.
you dont get to be treated fairly when you've had preferable treatment for the best part of 2 years
So the T race should get punished because of horrible maps and being too strong at release? That's a stupid attitude. Unfortunately it seems to be the same attitude Blizzard has. The same thing happened in WC3. It's a really really bad thing to be the strongest race at release in a Blizzard game.
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
I think he was rather talking about the way Mvp used Ravens. However, in my opinion the only reason for Ravens being strong was Metropolis.
Agree. Mvp managing to get Ravens on Metropolis while outplaying inferior opponents (including Nestea) in midgame hardly says anything about Raven's viability on any map between equally skilled opponents. Good luck getting a Raven fleet on Antiga.
Pretty sure Antiga is considered a terran favored map given the difficulty of taking the 4th and the ease of taking the third. And oh yeah, you can hold the middle pretty easily w/ planetary and tanks.
Pretty sure that's not his point. Good luck making ravens work against a similarly skilled opponent on any map that isn't Metropolis.(perhaps Shakuras would work too).
I make control groups, its only in crisis situations that it is a problem, when selecting the units is messy.
I understand that you think its a totally mundane issue, but I personally find that being able to I stim with siege tanks, thors, battlecruisers, banshees, vikings all on the same control group, but not if there is a raven. Is rather silly and pointless.
On September 01 2012 02:20 Sroobz wrote: How come they never talked about DRG NEVER HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH HELLIONS PRE-PATCH? They reference Mvp for the ravens...fucking blizzard. Such a joke
No zerg pro ever had problems with hellions. They were stupidly easy to defend against and while yes, it did force zerg to do a specific early game to defend or die, it's not like it's any different now (6 queen opening anyone?)
Except for when a terran goes reactor hellion and flat out kills all of the zergs drones and wins the game or when a terran would go all in marauder hellion and pro level zergs were struggling purely due to how terran players were microing their hellions. I'm pretty sure idra and a bunch of pro level zergs wouldn't agree with your statement.
On September 01 2012 02:13 hunts wrote: So blizzard finally does what so many people wanted: gives the meta game a chance to settle down, gives the pros a chance to figure things out, and everyone throws a fit? It really feels like no matter what blizzard does they can't please everyone, and the displeased whiners will always be the loudest.
Love how you dismiss the part about how they should have done this way earlier, and not post-Queen buff.
So basically ur ok with what blizz is doing but ur upset it follows a buff to a race you don't play, well that's nice. :-)
No. I would have been OK with Blizzard choosing a logic and sticking to said logic, not using double standards with terrible arguments and “evidences”.
So if Slivko had beaten Mvp we wouldn't be having this discussion now? Great job, Blizzard. No, I would not like to recieve an email telling me about your next design of destructible rocks.
Well it's true. More terrans then just MVP and taeja are winning tvz a lot lot more at the highest level. Of course foreign terrans have always struggled and now struggle more while Korean terrans have adjusted.
On September 01 2012 02:20 Sroobz wrote: How come they never talked about DRG NEVER HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH HELLIONS PRE-PATCH? They reference Mvp for the ravens...fucking blizzard. Such a joke
No zerg pro ever had problems with hellions. They were stupidly easy to defend against and while yes, it did force zerg to do a specific early game to defend or die, it's not like it's any different now (6 queen opening anyone?)
Except for when a terran goes reactor hellion and flat out kills all of the zergs drones and wins the game. I'm pretty sure idra and a bunch of pro level zergs wouldn't agree with your statement.
If pro level zergs are dying to reactor hellions, it's literally cause they're out of position and/or played way too greedy/no spines or evo chambers out.
Do you see a pro terran player complaining that they lost to a 4 gate without any bunkers or repair? It's the same idea.
I have the feeling some people just can't deal with the fact that they lose because they are just not good enough and dismiss the fact that pretty much all current tournaments are looking quite balanced.
Taking a look at the recent tourneys on liquipedia: IEM: pretty balanced Campus Party: pretty balanced WCS south korea: heavily toss favored WCS NA: slightly zerg favored MLG: pretty balanced
So although Terran is arguably the weakest, it's a very slight margin they are worse the other races and looking at the development over the past few months i see good chances we'll see Terran on top again quite soon. Although the development of protoss in Korea looks kinda bad in terms of balance.
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
I think he was rather talking about the way Mvp used Ravens. However, in my opinion the only reason for Ravens being strong was Metropolis.
Agree. Mvp managing to get Ravens on Metropolis while outplaying inferior opponents (including Nestea) in midgame hardly says anything about Raven's viability on any map between equally skilled opponents. Good luck getting a Raven fleet on Antiga.
Pretty sure Antiga is considered a terran favored map given the difficulty of taking the 4th and the ease of taking the third. And oh yeah, you can hold the middle pretty easily w/ planetary and tanks.
Pretty sure that's not his point. Good luck making ravens work against a similarly skilled opponent on any map that isn't Metropolis.(perhaps Shakuras would work too).
Probably not. But I decided to call him out on a silly statement.
I don't understand why there is so much QQ. The july winrates suggest that TvZ is pretty balanced
The inability of terrans to play their race well is no reason that nerfs/buffs are needed. That said, give it time, see where the metagame shifts to and then decide on the buff/nerf.
Ravens are probably one of the hardest units in the game to use effectively and efficiently. But just because MVP can do it, your regular bronze league terran player can also do it ... when the zerg has the ability to a-click with his corrupters, and maybe moves a few of them away from the main bunch.
On September 01 2012 02:33 blade55555 wrote: Well it's true. More terrans then just MVP and taeja are winning tvz a lot lot more at the highest level. Of course foreign terrans have always struggled and now struggle more while Korean terrans have adjusted.
its like comparing apple and oranges.. easily two of the three best KOREAN Terrans beating European Zergs and less then code-s talent Korean tosses and zergs doesnt mean anything... Taeja and MVP are simply better than the players they have been beating to such a degree that they are able to outmacro or micro to be cost efficient were other terrans just can't
Glad they did not make any changes. Granted, ravens could use a bit of a speed buff but if any race needs a change, it would be a nerf to protoss (my opinion). I believe we will be seeing much better terran players in the future now that kespa players are getting better.
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
I think he was rather talking about the way Mvp used Ravens. However, in my opinion the only reason for Ravens being strong was Metropolis.
Agree. Mvp managing to get Ravens on Metropolis while outplaying inferior opponents (including Nestea) in midgame hardly says anything about Raven's viability on any map between equally skilled opponents. Good luck getting a Raven fleet on Antiga.
Pretty sure Antiga is considered a terran favored map given the difficulty of taking the 4th and the ease of taking the third. And oh yeah, you can hold the middle pretty easily w/ planetary and tanks.
Not against BLs, and contrary to popular belief Antiga is not Terran favoured in TvZ (if cross spawns only). Antiga favours whoever controls the center, and depending on the midgame it can be either Terran or Zerg.
But my point was, Metropolis has particular map design (i. e. 5 bases easily defendable holding 2 chokes) that allows Terran to get Ravens and/or BCs more easily than other maps.
They didn't draw any conclusions whatsoever. They said they have reason to give it more time given that at the highest levels some Terrans are finding sucess vs Zergs. That's it. They are giving it more time. Calm down - if you're that worried about winning just stop playing until the next patch.
Terrans below GM level are pretty screwed because they don't have the apm or mechanics to pull off strategies like Mvp, Taeja and Kas do, just becuase the best player on the planet being Mvp can make ravens work vs mediocre foreign zergs doesn't make the matchup balanced.
We feel that at this time, we should give players more opportunities to fully explore the slowly-shifting meta-game before we change the balance of the game.
I really don't understand this logic, why didn't this apply to all of the other times when protoss and zerg were buffed and terran nerfed by complaining the game was imbalanced, yet the same thing is happening now with terrans asking for a small buff being a raven speed increase or a creep nerf and they say they should allow the metagame to shift. It makes no sense and they should have let the metagame shift all of the other times a patch was introduced. Not to mention the queen buuff that came from out of nowhere when matchups were fairly balanced and it was a completely unwanted change by 75% of the community.
It seems like the game has been patched far too much and they should have just left it like they did in BW by patching only when they really needed to, and is what should have happened in SC2 allowing protoss and zerg to figure shit out when they were complaining terran was OP.
On September 01 2012 02:20 Sroobz wrote: How come they never talked about DRG NEVER HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH HELLIONS PRE-PATCH? They reference Mvp for the ravens...fucking blizzard. Such a joke
No zerg pro ever had problems with hellions. They were stupidly easy to defend against and while yes, it did force zerg to do a specific early game to defend or die, it's not like it's any different now (6 queen opening anyone?)
Except for when a terran goes reactor hellion and flat out kills all of the zergs drones and wins the game. I'm pretty sure idra and a bunch of pro level zergs wouldn't agree with your statement.
If pro level zergs are dying to reactor hellions, it's literally cause they're out of position and/or played way too greedy/no spines or evo chambers out.
Do you see a pro terran player complaining that they lost to a 4 gate without any bunkers or repair? It's the same idea.
It's actually no where close to the same idea what so ever.
You fail to understand how a unit that cost only minerals, previous patches did significantly more damage than now, and was designed to be a harass unit should not have to be delt with like a 4 gat all in.
Zergs did make spines, had queens in position to block ramp, and had to make roaches (early gas investment into non tech) or rush tech (2 base muta/infestor) and regadless would still often lose to people who just made 10+ hellions and ran past or killed the queen blocking the ramp just as roaches could have possibly spawned. ( in which case you still had to run ALL of your drones to avoid loseing all your economy)
On September 01 2012 02:35 roym899 wrote: I have the feeling some people just can't deal with the fact that they lose because they are just not good enough and dismiss the fact that pretty much all current tournaments are looking quite balanced.
Taking a look at the recent tourneys on liquipedia: IEM: pretty balanced Campus Party: pretty balanced WCS south korea: heavily toss favored WCS NA: slightly zerg favored MLG: pretty balanced
So although Terran is arguably the weakest, it's a very slight margin they are worse the other races and looking at the development over the past few months i see good chances we'll see Terran on top again quite soon. Although the development of protoss in Korea looks kinda bad in terms of balance.
I wouldn't agree with WCS NA "slightly" Zerg favored with 15/32 being Z and having a ZvZ final. I'd call that Z domination. With the rest I can agree, can't comment on Campus Party, didn't watch. But yeah, T results in tourneys have stabilized over all. Though, like many have said, TvZ isn't as much fun to watch anymore, as T has only one viable early pressure left (hellion + marauder), so the Z can almost always turtle pretty greedily, which takes out some of the excitement.
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
Yeah, sadly. Some comments in this thread also feels to me like I'm surfing the battle net balance forums...
On September 01 2012 01:14 Kyrao wrote: So now we just need to wait another 3 months for Zerg players to learn how to spread units to avoid aoe damage... awesome.
That is pretty much impossible. The units clump far to much still so unless you spread out units all over the dam map, not much damage is gona be avoided.
The only thing a good spread will do is make you get a bigger area to hit the terran faster thats about it.
One statistic I'd be interested in (while not related to tvz balance) is how many of the PvZ games are won by a protoss in a 2 base all in/heavy aggressive midgame scenario. It's rare that I've seen a protoss win in the late game vs zerg, but I haven't watched any Korean games so I'm not sure.
On September 01 2012 02:20 Sroobz wrote: How come they never talked about DRG NEVER HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH HELLIONS PRE-PATCH? They reference Mvp for the ravens...fucking blizzard. Such a joke
No zerg pro ever had problems with hellions. They were stupidly easy to defend against and while yes, it did force zerg to do a specific early game to defend or die, it's not like it's any different now (6 queen opening anyone?)
Except for when a terran goes reactor hellion and flat out kills all of the zergs drones and wins the game. I'm pretty sure idra and a bunch of pro level zergs wouldn't agree with your statement.
If pro level zergs are dying to reactor hellions, it's literally cause they're out of position and/or played way too greedy/no spines or evo chambers out.
Do you see a pro terran player complaining that they lost to a 4 gate without any bunkers or repair? It's the same idea.
It's actually no where close to the same idea what so ever.
You fail to understand how a unit that cost only minerals, previous patches did significantly more damage than now, and was designed to be a harass unit should not have to be delt with like a 4 gat all in.
Zergs did make spines, had queens in position to block ramp, and had to make roaches (early gas investment into non tech) or rush tech (2 base muta/infestor) and regadless would still often lose to people who just made 10+ hellions and ran past or killed the queen blocking the ramp just as roaches could have possibly spawned. ( in which case you still had to run ALL of your drones to avoid loseing all your economy)
It's the same thing. If you died to 4-5 hellions you deserve to lose 100%. No one can argue that.
Losing to 10+ hellions is exactly the same as losing to a 4gate. 10+ hellions is very all-in.
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
I think he was rather talking about the way Mvp used Ravens. However, in my opinion the only reason for Ravens being strong was Metropolis.
Agree. Mvp managing to get Ravens on Metropolis while outplaying inferior opponents (including Nestea) in midgame hardly says anything about Raven's viability on any map between equally skilled opponents. Good luck getting a Raven fleet on Antiga.
Pretty sure Antiga is considered a terran favored map given the difficulty of taking the 4th and the ease of taking the third. And oh yeah, you can hold the middle pretty easily w/ planetary and tanks.
Not against BLs, and contrary to popular belief Antiga is not Terran favoured in TvZ (if cross spawns only). Antiga favours whoever controls the center, and depending on the midgame it can be either Terran or Zerg.
But my point was, Metropolis has particular map design (i. e. 5 bases easily defendable holding 2 chokes) that allows Terran to get Ravens and/or BCs more easily than other maps.
Antiga shipyard, TvZ, any league from May 31st 2012 to August 31, 2012
TvZ record: 98-99 (49.7%)
(note if you look only from July and August, percentage drops to 47%ish, if only August, percentage goes up to 54%; over life time of antiga it's 50.7% favoring T, but there's been a lot of changes since then)
You are right that if zerg can get the deathball composition they are in good shape. But records don't suggest a big imbalance.
On September 01 2012 02:20 Sroobz wrote: How come they never talked about DRG NEVER HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH HELLIONS PRE-PATCH? They reference Mvp for the ravens...fucking blizzard. Such a joke
No zerg pro ever had problems with hellions. They were stupidly easy to defend against and while yes, it did force zerg to do a specific early game to defend or die, it's not like it's any different now (6 queen opening anyone?)
Except for when a terran goes reactor hellion and flat out kills all of the zergs drones and wins the game. I'm pretty sure idra and a bunch of pro level zergs wouldn't agree with your statement.
If pro level zergs are dying to reactor hellions, it's literally cause they're out of position and/or played way too greedy/no spines or evo chambers out.
Do you see a pro terran player complaining that they lost to a 4 gate without any bunkers or repair? It's the same idea.
It's actually no where close to the same idea what so ever.
You fail to understand how a unit that cost only minerals, previous patches did significantly more damage than now, and was designed to be a harass unit should not have to be delt with like a 4 gat all in.
Zergs did make spines, had queens in position to block ramp, and had to make roaches (early gas investment into non tech) or rush tech (2 base muta/infestor) and regadless would still often lose to people who just made 10+ hellions and ran past or killed the queen blocking the ramp just as roaches could have possibly spawned. ( in which case you still had to run ALL of your drones to avoid loseing all your economy)
Yes, that's why every TvZ actually became a 10 hellion race. It's unstoppable. Making roaches is actually like typing gg. In fact, as soon as roaches pop out, you lose points and instantly get queued up against another Terran.
I'm sorry that Zerg has to commit something to defending a 10 hellion push (that would die pre patch to 1-2 spines, 2 queens and 5-6 roaches without even doing any sort of game ending damage if you had even the slightest sim city going on). You're right. It's better that Zerg gets 6 queens, and a free 3rd.
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
I dont agree with the TvZ was a great match up prior to the +2 queen range. I have a problem with a opening that was used on every map, every time. The only question was, "how many hellions will they build". But I guess it was nice for terrans to only have to know one build for the whole match up.
An opener that works on every map, every time? Are you talking about the 6 queen opener or what?
I hope you realise how hilariously ironic everything you just said is
But that ended pretty quickly. Now we see 4 queen builds with earlier pools coming back into style(MLG had tons of this) and we will see other styles come out as well.
Is the 6 queen opener not a stable build that can be used in every single map? Yes or no? If you wanna use the arguement just presented then Terran used other strategies aswell, sometimes it was cloak banshee, 2 rax and other early game stuff. But i guess we shoudent use that argument, because it makes your posting fall apart even more Moving on!
From my understanding, the 6 queen opening has no ability to punish a terran if he is greedy
Fortunately enough Zergs do not need to punish Terran greed because they can rush Hive and get their ultimate armies way faster than Terrans can.
It don’t think that is how it works. Maybe in your games where you cannot handle getting a such a robust terran economy so quickly.
Of course it is the way it works, in an even game Zergs can get BLs/Corruptors/Infestors before Terrans (or Protoss for that matter) can get their own ultimate compositions. Both Terrans and Protoss have to stall to reach said compositions.
That isn’t really true at all. If you think it is, you may need to go back to basics and learn some early timings to use against zerg and build up from there.
This is so ridiculous.. We saw a perfected TvZ style from MVP, using ravens and it still got crushed on maps that wasn't Metrolopolis. We see "rising stars," all of them zerg by the way, they are all kinda okayish, but they're beating top level korean Terrans that have ten times the experience. We see SortOf, Johnnyrecco, Slivko. players that are good, but suddenly they smash everything. We see Vortix a rising star, i saw him play in wc3 he was great, even in sc2 he's great. We compare him to Lucifron who was much greater in wc3 and greater in sc2, then suddenly Vortix breaks out, he is everything, one of the strongest players in the European scene and Lucifron is just another Terran.. We saw Vortix get absolutely manhandled in the early game by korean terrans cuz he, frankly didn't have the same knowledge of the early game. Then he proceeded to smash them in the late game..
Zergs still need to be good, what's most important is the time spent on the game. Because they need knowledge about everything, but when they do, they can absolutely out-brute force the two other races. I've seen games of Protoss' eating the entire map, getting the best army composition that is possible to acquire and then trade with the zerg 10:1 in unit efficiency. When i meet players in my masters league who are protoss, i can feel that they're kinda decent, when i meet terrans i can feel that they're absolutely amazing in macro and multitask, but still stuck in the league. When i meet Zergs they all simply derp around doing stupid junk and when you outplay them, by an absolutely outrageous amount, they start to complain.
I believe there is catching up to do, for Terrans in the metagame, but it won't change the fact that the Zerg race is simply so much surperior to the others. In macro/economy/unit efficiency/mobility/map control/scouting.. everything! Some Zergs are still absolutely amazing, don't get me wrong, but they're not the players that get rewarded. Players like Violet, Leenock, Bly, Dong Rae Gu, Symbol, are absolutely amazing players, they're multitask, understanding of the game, mechanics, all amazing, but what currently is broken, is the mass spines, mass infestor, broodlord style, which is an incredible easy to control army, easy to get aswell and absolutely smashes any army of protoss or terran and it rewards bad zerg players. Which is why at the moment it's hard to distinguish good players from bad, that are zerg. Cuz they're all doing well! Heck i even saw Gretorp, a caster that off-raced as Zerg, make Alive, a freaking Korean superstar Terran, work for his victory, the other day!
I love how the only time they actually put some thought into doing a balance change before blindly implementing it is when part of it (the raven) actually would have been useful. Seriously, of all the ridiculous changes they made, it's a small speed buff that they back off on because of ONE tournament result, yet months of almost no terrans besides Taeja doing well does nothing. I guess when MVP and Taeja win games, everything must all be balanced. This is just stupid.
On September 01 2012 01:27 TheDwf wrote: [quote] People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
I dont agree with the TvZ was a great match up prior to the +2 queen range. I have a problem with a opening that was used on every map, every time. The only question was, "how many hellions will they build". But I guess it was nice for terrans to only have to know one build for the whole match up.
An opener that works on every map, every time? Are you talking about the 6 queen opener or what?
I hope you realise how hilariously ironic everything you just said is
But that ended pretty quickly. Now we see 4 queen builds with earlier pools coming back into style(MLG had tons of this) and we will see other styles come out as well.
Is the 6 queen opener not a stable build that can be used in every single map? Yes or no? If you wanna use the arguement just presented then Terran used other strategies aswell, sometimes it was cloak banshee, 2 rax and other early game stuff. But i guess we shoudent use that argument, because it makes your posting fall apart even more Moving on!
From my understanding, the 6 queen opening has no ability to punish a terran if he is greedy
Fortunately enough Zergs do not need to punish Terran greed because they can rush Hive and get their ultimate armies way faster than Terrans can.
It don’t think that is how it works. Maybe in your games where you cannot handle getting a such a robust terran economy so quickly.
Of course it is the way it works, in an even game Zergs can get BLs/Corruptors/Infestors before Terrans (or Protoss for that matter) can get their own ultimate compositions. Both Terrans and Protoss have to stall to reach said compositions.
That isn’t really true at all. If you think it is, you may need to go back to basics and learn some early timings to use against zerg and build up from there.
I think those early timing you are refering to are what he called the stalling that is necessary for T and P.
On September 01 2012 02:20 Sroobz wrote: How come they never talked about DRG NEVER HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH HELLIONS PRE-PATCH? They reference Mvp for the ravens...fucking blizzard. Such a joke
No zerg pro ever had problems with hellions. They were stupidly easy to defend against and while yes, it did force zerg to do a specific early game to defend or die, it's not like it's any different now (6 queen opening anyone?)
Except for when a terran goes reactor hellion and flat out kills all of the zergs drones and wins the game. I'm pretty sure idra and a bunch of pro level zergs wouldn't agree with your statement.
If pro level zergs are dying to reactor hellions, it's literally cause they're out of position and/or played way too greedy/no spines or evo chambers out.
Do you see a pro terran player complaining that they lost to a 4 gate without any bunkers or repair? It's the same idea.
Pro level zergs are now no longer having trouble with hellions. That doesn't mean that they didn't have trouble dealing with them for quite a long period of time. Just like how terrans are now having trouble with creep. Eventually they'll figure out how to deal with it just as zergs did with hellions. Why do I bring this up? Because the current state of the game is different now than it was a year ago or at release and it will be different in 2013. The devs didn't say "OH TVZ IS FINE EVERYBODY CAN RELAX". They said that they see untapped potential with the raven that terrans haven't explored enough yet and they want to see how it pans out before just making changes.
Brood war didn't become a powerhouse because blizzard kept releasing patches to fix imbalance. It became a powerhouse because the players figured out ways to deal with imbalances (Think back to when muta micro was discovered.). and if the players couldn't figure out anything eventually maps would be created to address the issue.
On September 01 2012 02:20 Sroobz wrote: How come they never talked about DRG NEVER HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH HELLIONS PRE-PATCH? They reference Mvp for the ravens...fucking blizzard. Such a joke
No zerg pro ever had problems with hellions. They were stupidly easy to defend against and while yes, it did force zerg to do a specific early game to defend or die, it's not like it's any different now (6 queen opening anyone?)
Except for when a terran goes reactor hellion and flat out kills all of the zergs drones and wins the game. I'm pretty sure idra and a bunch of pro level zergs wouldn't agree with your statement.
If pro level zergs are dying to reactor hellions, it's literally cause they're out of position and/or played way too greedy/no spines or evo chambers out.
Do you see a pro terran player complaining that they lost to a 4 gate without any bunkers or repair? It's the same idea.
It's actually no where close to the same idea what so ever.
You fail to understand how a unit that cost only minerals, previous patches did significantly more damage than now, and was designed to be a harass unit should not have to be delt with like a 4 gat all in.
Zergs did make spines, had queens in position to block ramp, and had to make roaches (early gas investment into non tech) or rush tech (2 base muta/infestor) and regadless would still often lose to people who just made 10+ hellions and ran past or killed the queen blocking the ramp just as roaches could have possibly spawned. ( in which case you still had to run ALL of your drones to avoid loseing all your economy)
Arguably though, the Overlord speed buff would've fixed this without making the early game extremely boring. The big problem with hellion openers is zerg players didn't know if there were going to be 4-6 hellions or 10-15 hellions, or a hellion/marauder all in. With the overlord speed buff Zerg players could've actually gone into the terran base and seen if it was a typical hellion expand or something way more dangerous. As a result Zerg wouldn't have been stuck making a sim city and praying only 4-6 hellions showed up.
The queen buff + overlord buff made it so Terran can't do any kind of early pressure/denial without risking falling so far behind they essentially just lose the game. As a result Terrans have to be greedy instead, which leads to a giant period of the game where Terran players build 3 OCs and Zerg gets on 3 bases. It's not nearly as fun to watch as Zerg fending off Terran early pressure and then countering/expanding. The fun of TvZ was largely that the match played out on a razor's edge. If you defended poorly you lost lots of drones. If you didn't do enough damage as Terran you'd get baneling busted or you'd be unprepared for incoming mutas and lose tons of scvs. It was back and forth from the first minute. Now it takes anywhere from 6-10 minutes for any actual action to happen in the match. Maybe it's more balanced, but from a spectating point of view the matchup is just a shadow of it's former self.
i just don't understand why people bring up WCS in a TvZ balance whine thread... zerg did pretty terrible in that as well. Protoss is dominant in WCS and arguably the best terran in WCS forfeited his match to go to IEM (which he won.)
If you look at the results of ZvT on liquipedia, there were 9 matches of TvZ and 4 matches were won by terran while 5 were won by zerg. It is a far cry from what a lot of people are saying "WCS LOOK AT RESULTS, THEY SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES".
On September 01 2012 01:27 TheDwf wrote: [quote] People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
I dont agree with the TvZ was a great match up prior to the +2 queen range. I have a problem with a opening that was used on every map, every time. The only question was, "how many hellions will they build". But I guess it was nice for terrans to only have to know one build for the whole match up.
An opener that works on every map, every time? Are you talking about the 6 queen opener or what?
I hope you realise how hilariously ironic everything you just said is
But that ended pretty quickly. Now we see 4 queen builds with earlier pools coming back into style(MLG had tons of this) and we will see other styles come out as well.
Is the 6 queen opener not a stable build that can be used in every single map? Yes or no? If you wanna use the arguement just presented then Terran used other strategies aswell, sometimes it was cloak banshee, 2 rax and other early game stuff. But i guess we shoudent use that argument, because it makes your posting fall apart even more Moving on!
From my understanding, the 6 queen opening has no ability to punish a terran if he is greedy
Fortunately enough Zergs do not need to punish Terran greed because they can rush Hive and get their ultimate armies way faster than Terrans can.
It don’t think that is how it works. Maybe in your games where you cannot handle getting a such a robust terran economy so quickly.
Of course it is the way it works, in an even game Zergs can get BLs/Corruptors/Infestors before Terrans (or Protoss for that matter) can get their own ultimate compositions. Both Terrans and Protoss have to stall to reach said compositions.
That isn’t really true at all. If you think it is, you may need to go back to basics and learn some early timings to use against zerg and build up from there.
OK, any link to pro games in which Protoss get Carriers/Storm/Mothership or Terrans get Ravens/BCs/Vikings before Zergs gets BLs/Corruptors/Infests?
On September 01 2012 02:20 Sroobz wrote: How come they never talked about DRG NEVER HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH HELLIONS PRE-PATCH? They reference Mvp for the ravens...fucking blizzard. Such a joke
No zerg pro ever had problems with hellions. They were stupidly easy to defend against and while yes, it did force zerg to do a specific early game to defend or die, it's not like it's any different now (6 queen opening anyone?)
Except for when a terran goes reactor hellion and flat out kills all of the zergs drones and wins the game. I'm pretty sure idra and a bunch of pro level zergs wouldn't agree with your statement.
If pro level zergs are dying to reactor hellions, it's literally cause they're out of position and/or played way too greedy/no spines or evo chambers out.
Do you see a pro terran player complaining that they lost to a 4 gate without any bunkers or repair? It's the same idea.
Pro level zergs are now no longer having trouble with hellions. That doesn't mean that they didn't have trouble dealing with them for quite a long period of time. Just like how terrans are now having trouble with creep. Eventually they'll figure out how to deal with it just as zergs did with hellions. Why do I bring this up? Because the current state of the game is different now than it was a year ago or at release and it will be different in 2013. The devs didn't say "OH TVZ IS FINE EVERYBODY CAN RELAX". They said that they see untapped potential with the raven that terrans haven't explored enough yet and they want to see how it pans out before just making changes.
Brood war didn't become a powerhouse because blizzard kept releasing patches to fix imbalance. It became a powerhouse by the players and map makers finding ways around imbalances.
That's fine. Really, it is. But why knee jerk every other decision in SC2's life, and have this one be "let's just wait and see"
They seem to be forgetting that if you remove Taeja and MVP's TvZ win rates, TvZ shifts heavily (by about 5%) into zerg's favour. As well as this, only korean TvZ favours T (again, remove Taeja and MVP and this is not the case). Not only that, but look at all the up-and-coming zergs now. Suppy, Slivko, SortOf, Sasquatch, PiG, etc. The only up and coming Terran player (other than BW pros) I see clearly is Major. And as for up-and-coming protoss... maybe HasuObs..? Though he has been on and off for a while now.
Blizzard really isn't seeing any big picture of the issue.
On September 01 2012 02:20 Sroobz wrote: How come they never talked about DRG NEVER HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH HELLIONS PRE-PATCH? They reference Mvp for the ravens...fucking blizzard. Such a joke
No zerg pro ever had problems with hellions. They were stupidly easy to defend against and while yes, it did force zerg to do a specific early game to defend or die, it's not like it's any different now (6 queen opening anyone?)
Except for when a terran goes reactor hellion and flat out kills all of the zergs drones and wins the game. I'm pretty sure idra and a bunch of pro level zergs wouldn't agree with your statement.
If pro level zergs are dying to reactor hellions, it's literally cause they're out of position and/or played way too greedy/no spines or evo chambers out.
Do you see a pro terran player complaining that they lost to a 4 gate without any bunkers or repair? It's the same idea.
It's actually no where close to the same idea what so ever.
You fail to understand how a unit that cost only minerals, previous patches did significantly more damage than now, and was designed to be a harass unit should not have to be delt with like a 4 gat all in.
Zergs did make spines, had queens in position to block ramp, and had to make roaches (early gas investment into non tech) or rush tech (2 base muta/infestor) and regadless would still often lose to people who just made 10+ hellions and ran past or killed the queen blocking the ramp just as roaches could have possibly spawned. ( in which case you still had to run ALL of your drones to avoid loseing all your economy)
Yes, that's why every TvZ actually became a 10 hellion race. It's unstoppable. Making roaches is actually like typing gg. In fact, as soon as roaches pop out, you lose points and instantly get queued up against another Terran.
I'm sorry that Zerg has to commit something to defending a 10 hellion push (that would die pre patch to 1-2 spines, 2 queens and 5-6 roaches without even doing any sort of game ending damage if you had even the slightest sim city going on). You're right. It's better that Zerg gets 6 queens, and a free 3rd.
Yup
So you didn't even win in previous patches? You should watch a YouTube video or 2 of some past games. You might actually cry about how "bad" your race was.
Its funny that low level players complain terran is difficult to play and needs so much APM that they have no skill to play. Look.. I makez ez unitz for u... see my battle hellion, widow mine and warhound... A-move for u... no?
Wow.. teamliquid.. whine threads and controversy storms... dang... so much for me to read nowadays!
On September 01 2012 02:58 lazyitachi wrote: Its funny that low level players complain terran is difficult to play and needs so much APM that they have no skill to play. Look.. I makez ez unitz for u... see my battle hellion, widow mine and warhound... A-move for u... no?
Wow.. teamliquid.. whine threads and controversy storms... dang... so much for me to read nowadays!
lol WAT that isn't being discussed at all in this thread
I wish they would have used this philosophy for the whole game I think is the point most terrans in this thread are making. I think there are a few changes they made that woudl have had to be made regardless. Stim timing nerf, blue flame hellion nerf, warpgate and void ray nerf. However, the rest of it should have been left alone. and now they use this reasoning, and it just sounds hypocritical and it comes off as extremely unfair to the terran playerbase.
This whole "foreign terrans are bad" thing is also pretty ridiculous. Its true results wise, but consider why its not true for foreign protoss and zerg. Maybe its a design issue with the game, but still its really pretty awful to be a pro foreign terran and be constantly written off as inferior when I would wager they are probably better/smarter RTS players than many of their more successful zerg/protoss peers. I do wonder why they stay with terran though given the circumstances.
The only thing i'm sad about is that TvZ has become more boring. Lately is all "turtle to victory" for zerg. The terran that are doing good, are going super macro opening. While i don't hate the macro games, imho the oldest balance of early-game aggression for terran into mid-game aggression for zerg (muta) was the best matchup to see, even if it felt slightly favored for terran.
On September 01 2012 02:51 SolidMoose wrote: I love how the only time they actually put some thought into doing a balance change before blindly implementing it is when part of it (the raven) actually would have been useful. Seriously, of all the ridiculous changes they made, it's a small speed buff that they back off on because of ONE tournament result, yet months of almost no terrans besides Taeja doing well does nothing. I guess when MVP and Taeja win games, everything must all be balanced. This is just stupid.
Balanced in such a way that's not impossible to win. You're forgetting that there are plenty of other good terrans(none in eu though) TheStc,Supernova,Ryung, Alive are all quite legit and win vs Z games left and right.
While I applaud Blizzard's reluctance to introduce new changes, but a bit weird that they do it now when HotS is getting released. Raven buff would be quite good, if nothing else it would make people use ravens even more just because they would get buffed.
not that worried about balance at the moment if at all.
with HOTS around the corner, balance will change so much anyways. I'm more worried about blizzard making bad game design choices. which they already have in WOL, but I won't mention as it'll just end up in pointless debate.
I seriously wish that DKim would have warned us to build an Ark or two before releasing this information... the Terran tears are likely to drown us all. It is also interesting to see people complain about them using Pro results with their APM intensive strategies as a basis for their balancing (or lack thereof). So because YOU can't execute the strategy, we should add a fix to make the game easier for you? Yep, you sure do sound like a Terran.
On September 01 2012 03:09 Dosey wrote: I seriously wish that DKim would have warned us to build an Ark or two before releasing this information... the Terran tears are likely to drown us all. It is also interesting to see people complain about them using Pro results with their APM intensive strategies as a basis for their balancing (or lack thereof). So because YOU can't execute the strategy, we should add a fix to make the game easier for you? Yep, you sure do sound like a Terran.
don't make the game easier then
make the game harder for everyone else
I'd love to just a move (no i actually wouldn't, i hate you for making me do it HoTS) into stuff and spam F or T and get similar results as pros
People are going to complain hardcore. I really am surprised they changed nothing. Happily surprised though. I mean, its a good thing that they aren't rashly changing things in the game. I like that they are taking a more slow approach now than they have in the past.
On September 01 2012 03:09 Dosey wrote: I seriously wish that DKim would have warned us to build an Ark or two before releasing this information... the Terran tears are likely to drown us all. It is also interesting to see people complain about them using Pro results with their APM intensive strategies as a basis for their balancing (or lack thereof). So because YOU can't execute the strategy, we should add a fix to make the game easier for you? Yep, you sure do sound like a Terran.
don't make the game easier then
make the game harder for everyone else
I'd love to just a move (no i actually wouldn't, i hate you for making me do it HoTS) into stuff and spam F or T and get similar results as pros
You know, for the first 1.5 years of SC2 everyone was making fun of terran for simply hitting stim and then A-Moving.
Either way you look at it, ravens are either A) a really slow overpriced detector... or B) a really shiiittyyy caster unit so in either case, it's bad...
What's worse than tears is the condescending Zergs sitting high and mighty, saying that they have the mechanics of Dong Rae Gu and says that Terrans should just get mechanics like MVP.
What's wrong with making Zerg and Protoss as difficult as Terran? Obviously at the top level the races can all be competitive, but it's clear that Zerg and Toss players below the top .1% have a much easier time in their matchups than Terran.
It's stupid to make Terran easier or stronger, yes. Very stupid.
It's also stupid to leave Zerg and Protoss the way they are -- virtually microless, with simple, 1 route tech paths.
People are going to complain hardcore. I really am surprised they changed nothing. Happily surprised though. I mean, its a good thing that they aren't rashly changing things in the game. I like that they are taking a more slow approach now than they have in the past.
On September 01 2012 03:09 Dosey wrote: I seriously wish that DKim would have warned us to build an Ark or two before releasing this information... the Terran tears are likely to drown us all. It is also interesting to see people complain about them using Pro results with their APM intensive strategies as a basis for their balancing (or lack thereof). So because YOU can't execute the strategy, we should add a fix to make the game easier for you? Yep, you sure do sound like a Terran.
don't make the game easier then
make the game harder for everyone else
I'd love to just a move (no i actually wouldn't, i hate you for making me do it HoTS) into stuff and spam F or T and get similar results as pros
You know, for the first 1.5 years of SC2 everyone was making fun of terran for simply hitting stim and then A-Moving.
On September 01 2012 03:13 DebtSC2 wrote: Someone answer me this:
What's wrong with making Zerg and Protoss as difficult as Terran? Obviously at the top level the races can all be competitive, but it's clear that Zerg and Toss players below the top .1% have a much easier time in their matchups than Terran.
It's stupid to make Terran easier or stronger, yes. Very stupid.
It's also stupid to leave Zerg and Protoss the way they are -- virtually microless, with simple, 1 route tech paths.
Yes, 1 route tech path because Terrans don't get barracks -- factory -- starport every game?
Look, Terran requires some more micro, its different than the micro of the other races. Protoss relies on spell micro, terran on large army control, and zerg on positioning. Nothing wrong with asymmetric design.
On September 01 2012 02:44 Tao367 wrote: One statistic I'd be interested in (while not related to tvz balance) is how many of the PvZ games are won by a protoss in a 2 base all in/heavy aggressive midgame scenario. It's rare that I've seen a protoss win in the late game vs zerg, but I haven't watched any Korean games so I'm not sure.
Yes. I think that the reason Protoss go all-in from 2 bases so much isn't because they want to all-in or have no skill/honor whatever, it is because Protoss has difficultly late game vs Zerg. Depending heavily on the Vortex is just risky.
On September 01 2012 03:13 DebtSC2 wrote: Someone answer me this:
What's wrong with making Zerg and Protoss as difficult as Terran? Obviously at the top level the races can all be competitive, but it's clear that Zerg and Toss players below the top .1% have a much easier time in their matchups than Terran.
It's stupid to make Terran easier or stronger, yes. Very stupid.
It's also stupid to leave Zerg and Protoss the way they are -- virtually microless, with simple, 1 route tech paths.
Yes, 1 route tech path because Terrans don't get barracks -- factory -- starport every game?
Look, Terran requires some more micro, its different than the micro of the other races. Protoss relies on spell micro, terran on large army control, and zerg on positioning. Nothing wrong with asymmetric design.
Except its not asymmetric, its completely lopsided. I play P and Z and T all at the master level, all around 1100 pt in master. I play terran at least twice as much as the other races combined. It is orders of magnitude easier to win with Z and P, because they are vastly simpler mechanically compared to Terran.
It's not asymmetric. For two races it's very easy. For one race its difficult.
I think its a shame they arent adding the raven buff. The patches shake the game up and make the tournaments more interesting, no matter which race they nerf or buff.
On September 01 2012 03:13 DebtSC2 wrote: Someone answer me this:
What's wrong with making Zerg and Protoss as difficult as Terran? Obviously at the top level the races can all be competitive, but it's clear that Zerg and Toss players below the top .1% have a much easier time in their matchups than Terran.
It's stupid to make Terran easier or stronger, yes. Very stupid.
It's also stupid to leave Zerg and Protoss the way they are -- virtually microless, with simple, 1 route tech paths.
Being micro intensive does not mean that it is the most difficult race...
People that post in this thread should post own battle net account link.. that we all can see , what skill lv they are. 80% of post here sound like bronze-plat players.. its insane.
absolutly RIGHT gsl code S most players are terrans now and if you gave a look to REALITY ... he 2-0 EVERY zerg ... shine symbol yugioh he dont care 2-0 over and over, if other players start play like reality ... damn terran is so strong perfect balance for me right now
you all seems want a tvz buff while there is a player with a 100000-0 record in tvz ... perhaps terrans have to addept ?
On September 01 2012 03:32 CoR wrote: absolutly RIGHT gsl code S most players are terrans now and if you gave a look to REALITY ... he 2-0 EVERY zerg ... shine symbol yugioh he dont care 2-0 over and over, if other players start play like reality ... damn terran is so strong perfect balance for me right now
you all seems want a tvz buff while there is a player with a 100000-0 record in tvz ... perhaps terrans have to addept ?
True.. if SOMEONE CAN make good strategy or build working.. NEED TO PLAY more.. and NOT WHINE at balance .. some players show that is possible to win vs zergs players ez..
On September 01 2012 03:32 CoR wrote: absolutly RIGHT gsl code S most players are terrans now and if you gave a look to REALITY ... he 2-0 EVERY zerg ... shine symbol yugioh he dont care 2-0 over and over, if other players start play like reality ... damn terran is so strong perfect balance for me right now
you all seems want a tvz buff while there is a player with a 100000-0 record in tvz ... perhaps terrans have to addept ?
Adapt* Adept means proficient or expert like (which these QQers clearly are not) Unless of course you want to say they are adept at balance whining.
On September 01 2012 03:13 DebtSC2 wrote: Someone answer me this:
What's wrong with making Zerg and Protoss as difficult as Terran? Obviously at the top level the races can all be competitive, but it's clear that Zerg and Toss players below the top .1% have a much easier time in their matchups than Terran.
It's stupid to make Terran easier or stronger, yes. Very stupid.
It's also stupid to leave Zerg and Protoss the way they are -- virtually microless, with simple, 1 route tech paths.
Yes, 1 route tech path because Terrans don't get barracks -- factory -- starport every game?
Look, Terran requires some more micro, its different than the micro of the other races. Protoss relies on spell micro, terran on large army control, and zerg on positioning. Nothing wrong with asymmetric design.
Except its not asymmetric, its completely lopsided. I play P and Z and T all at the master level, all around 1100 pt in master. I play terran at least twice as much as the other races combined. It is orders of magnitude easier to win with Z and P, because they are vastly simpler mechanically compared to Terran.
It's not asymmetric. For two races it's very easy. For one race its difficult.
Your anecdotes are not evidence. I'm sorry but any one person trying to claim that their experience somehow makes balance complaints valid is hilarious. You might play the game of starcraft in a manner that suites other races more than Terran. Just because one random masters player says it, doesn't mean its true.
On the principal of not changing things until they're sure they need to, good job Blizzard.
The thing though in this thread that has surprised me the most is the amount of people who seem to have no idea why the Queen buff happened. It's true, the match up was close to balanced stats wise at that point, but that has literally nothing to do with why they made that change, as they've said repeatedly. Blizzard felt like it was too easy to do something early game to a Zerg like a Hellion run by and too difficult (relatively speaking) to defend it. It literally had nothing to do with whether the match up as a whole was balanced, but rather, Blizzard's interpretation of the game in that moment.
That said though, for the same reason as above, I think it's odd Blizzard chose to leave the Raven as is whilst also saying it needs further exploration. I think a lot of people see that unit could be more fun and simpler to use and maybe even to get in to play.
On September 01 2012 03:29 pallad wrote: People that post in this thread should post own battle net account link.. that we all can see , what skill lv they are. 80% of post here sound like bronze-plat players.. its insane.
I think that would be a wise thing to include in all balance related threads.
On September 01 2012 03:13 DebtSC2 wrote: Someone answer me this:
What's wrong with making Zerg and Protoss as difficult as Terran? Obviously at the top level the races can all be competitive, but it's clear that Zerg and Toss players below the top .1% have a much easier time in their matchups than Terran.
It's stupid to make Terran easier or stronger, yes. Very stupid.
It's also stupid to leave Zerg and Protoss the way they are -- virtually microless, with simple, 1 route tech paths.
Yes, 1 route tech path because Terrans don't get barracks -- factory -- starport every game?
Look, Terran requires some more micro, its different than the micro of the other races. Protoss relies on spell micro, terran on large army control, and zerg on positioning. Nothing wrong with asymmetric design.
Except its not asymmetric, its completely lopsided. I play P and Z and T all at the master level, all around 1100 pt in master. I play terran at least twice as much as the other races combined. It is orders of magnitude easier to win with Z and P, because they are vastly simpler mechanically compared to Terran.
It's not asymmetric. For two races it's very easy. For one race its difficult.
so you play all three races, have the same amount of points in master league with all three, and then turn around and say it's completely lopsided? shouldn't you have much less points with terran if that was the case?
it's not about what's easier to do or not. you don't see baseball players debating whether it's harder to pitch or to hit, do you?
On September 01 2012 03:13 DebtSC2 wrote: Someone answer me this:
What's wrong with making Zerg and Protoss as difficult as Terran? Obviously at the top level the races can all be competitive, but it's clear that Zerg and Toss players below the top .1% have a much easier time in their matchups than Terran.
It's stupid to make Terran easier or stronger, yes. Very stupid.
It's also stupid to leave Zerg and Protoss the way they are -- virtually microless, with simple, 1 route tech paths.
Yes, 1 route tech path because Terrans don't get barracks -- factory -- starport every game?
Look, Terran requires some more micro, its different than the micro of the other races. Protoss relies on spell micro, terran on large army control, and zerg on positioning. Nothing wrong with asymmetric design.
Except its not asymmetric, its completely lopsided. I play P and Z and T all at the master level, all around 1100 pt in master. I play terran at least twice as much as the other races combined. It is orders of magnitude easier to win with Z and P, because they are vastly simpler mechanically compared to Terran.
It's not asymmetric. For two races it's very easy. For one race its difficult.
so you play all three races, have the same amount of points in master league with all three, and then turn around and say it's completely lopsided? shouldn't you have much less points with terran if that was the case?
it's not about what's easier to do or not. you don't see baseball players debating whether it's harder to pitch or to hit, do you?
WELL, he did say he plays twice as much terran, so you'd expect him to be much better/higher rated with terran. The fact that he's not, in his mind, is an indication that terran is more difficult.
On September 01 2012 03:13 DebtSC2 wrote: Someone answer me this:
What's wrong with making Zerg and Protoss as difficult as Terran? Obviously at the top level the races can all be competitive, but it's clear that Zerg and Toss players below the top .1% have a much easier time in their matchups than Terran.
It's stupid to make Terran easier or stronger, yes. Very stupid.
It's also stupid to leave Zerg and Protoss the way they are -- virtually microless, with simple, 1 route tech paths.
Yes, 1 route tech path because Terrans don't get barracks -- factory -- starport every game?
Look, Terran requires some more micro, its different than the micro of the other races. Protoss relies on spell micro, terran on large army control, and zerg on positioning. Nothing wrong with asymmetric design.
Except its not asymmetric, its completely lopsided. I play P and Z and T all at the master level, all around 1100 pt in master. I play terran at least twice as much as the other races combined. It is orders of magnitude easier to win with Z and P, because they are vastly simpler mechanically compared to Terran.
It's not asymmetric. For two races it's very easy. For one race its difficult.
so you play all three races, have the same amount of points in master league with all three, and then turn around and say it's completely lopsided? shouldn't you have much less points with terran if that was the case?
it's not about what's easier to do or not. you don't see baseball players debating whether it's harder to pitch or to hit, do you?
He's clearly a bullshitter that is trying to use some invented rank to validate his opinion. Much like a vast majority of TL... I can't count how many time I've read in a balance or strategy thread with posts that started off with "xx Master level here" or "I am a 1700 Diamond Protoss and..."
On September 01 2012 03:13 DebtSC2 wrote: Someone answer me this:
What's wrong with making Zerg and Protoss as difficult as Terran? Obviously at the top level the races can all be competitive, but it's clear that Zerg and Toss players below the top .1% have a much easier time in their matchups than Terran.
It's stupid to make Terran easier or stronger, yes. Very stupid.
It's also stupid to leave Zerg and Protoss the way they are -- virtually microless, with simple, 1 route tech paths.
Yes, 1 route tech path because Terrans don't get barracks -- factory -- starport every game?
Look, Terran requires some more micro, its different than the micro of the other races. Protoss relies on spell micro, terran on large army control, and zerg on positioning. Nothing wrong with asymmetric design.
Except its not asymmetric, its completely lopsided. I play P and Z and T all at the master level, all around 1100 pt in master. I play terran at least twice as much as the other races combined. It is orders of magnitude easier to win with Z and P, because they are vastly simpler mechanically compared to Terran.
It's not asymmetric. For two races it's very easy. For one race its difficult.
Your anecdotes are not evidence. I'm sorry but any one person trying to claim that their experience somehow makes balance complaints valid is hilarious. You might play the game of starcraft in a manner that suites other races more than Terran. Just because one random masters player says it, doesn't mean its true.
It would be nice if there was neat way to summarize why Terran is more difficult than the other two races, rather than using (as you correctly pointed out) flawed anecdotal evidence. If there was, I would certainly do it instead of trying to rely on the relatively weak arguments currently at my disposal. I can point out how Terran representation is lacking in all but the highest levels of play and the lowest levels of play. I can show statistics that clearly indicate a decline of foreign terrans, but success among the most skilled and practiced korean terrans. Alas, all of these are incomplete arguments.
Nevertheless I doubt many pro players would disagree that Terran has more skills to perfect than the other two races. They benefit more from practice and are punished more severely for not practicing. I think the other two races should be brought in line, if not all three have substantial increases in their respective skill caps.
Edit: 1100 pt Master is also nothing to give my arguments credence, I'm just saying where I'm coming from. 1100 pt master to pro is almost as large a gap as platinum to pro, so yeah. My rank isn't really supposed to justify what I'm saying.
On September 01 2012 03:13 DebtSC2 wrote: Someone answer me this:
What's wrong with making Zerg and Protoss as difficult as Terran? Obviously at the top level the races can all be competitive, but it's clear that Zerg and Toss players below the top .1% have a much easier time in their matchups than Terran.
It's stupid to make Terran easier or stronger, yes. Very stupid.
It's also stupid to leave Zerg and Protoss the way they are -- virtually microless, with simple, 1 route tech paths.
Yes, 1 route tech path because Terrans don't get barracks -- factory -- starport every game?
Look, Terran requires some more micro, its different than the micro of the other races. Protoss relies on spell micro, terran on large army control, and zerg on positioning. Nothing wrong with asymmetric design.
Except its not asymmetric, its completely lopsided. I play P and Z and T all at the master level, all around 1100 pt in master. I play terran at least twice as much as the other races combined. It is orders of magnitude easier to win with Z and P, because they are vastly simpler mechanically compared to Terran.
It's not asymmetric. For two races it's very easy. For one race its difficult.
so you play all three races, have the same amount of points in master league with all three, and then turn around and say it's completely lopsided? shouldn't you have much less points with terran if that was the case?
it's not about what's easier to do or not. you don't see baseball players debating whether it's harder to pitch or to hit, do you?
He's clearly a bullshitter that is trying to use some invented rank to validate his opinion. Much like a vast majority of TL... I can't count how many time I've read in a balance or strategy thread with posts that started off with "xx Master level here" or "I am a 1700 Diamond Protoss and..."
For what it's worth, in strategy threads at least it's nice to let people know where you're coming from. A lot of the times, I see people open their posts with "I'm only in plat, so take this with a grain of salt, but here are my thoughts"-- it's just common courtesy.
On September 01 2012 03:36 Iyerbeth wrote: On the principal of not changing things until they're sure they need to, good job Blizzard.
The thing though in this thread that has surprised me the most is the amount of people who seem to have no idea why the Queen buff happened. It's true, the match up was close to balanced stats wise at that point, but that has literally nothing to do with why they made that change, as they've said repeatedly. Blizzard felt like it was too easy to do something early game to a Zerg like a Hellion run by and too difficult (relatively speaking) to defend it.
Yes, it was and still is sooo difficult to get an Evolution Chamber/Spine/Queen wall to prevent Hellions from running in... The Queen range changed nothing in this regard. Zergs still need proper building placement—and still lose many drones to Hellions raids when failing to do so.
On September 01 2012 03:13 DebtSC2 wrote: Someone answer me this:
What's wrong with making Zerg and Protoss as difficult as Terran? Obviously at the top level the races can all be competitive, but it's clear that Zerg and Toss players below the top .1% have a much easier time in their matchups than Terran.
It's stupid to make Terran easier or stronger, yes. Very stupid.
It's also stupid to leave Zerg and Protoss the way they are -- virtually microless, with simple, 1 route tech paths.
Yes, 1 route tech path because Terrans don't get barracks -- factory -- starport every game?
Look, Terran requires some more micro, its different than the micro of the other races. Protoss relies on spell micro, terran on large army control, and zerg on positioning. Nothing wrong with asymmetric design.
Except its not asymmetric, its completely lopsided. I play P and Z and T all at the master level, all around 1100 pt in master. I play terran at least twice as much as the other races combined. It is orders of magnitude easier to win with Z and P, because they are vastly simpler mechanically compared to Terran.
It's not asymmetric. For two races it's very easy. For one race its difficult.
Your anecdotes are not evidence. I'm sorry but any one person trying to claim that their experience somehow makes balance complaints valid is hilarious. You might play the game of starcraft in a manner that suites other races more than Terran. Just because one random masters player says it, doesn't mean its true.
It would be nice if there was neat way to summarize why Terran is more difficult than the other two races, rather than using (as you correctly pointed out) flawed anecdotal evidence. If there was, I would certainly do it instead of trying to rely on the relatively weak arguments currently at my disposal. I can point out how Terran representation is lacking in all but the highest levels of play and the lowest levels of play. I can show statistics that clearly indicate a decline of foreign terrans, but success among the most skilled and practiced korean terrans. Alas, all of these are incomplete arguments.
Nevertheless I doubt many pro players would disagree that Terran has more skills to perfect than the other two races. They benefit more from practice and are punished more severely for not practicing. I think the other two races should be brought in line, if not all three have substantial increases in their respective skill caps.
The funny thing is that if you were actually as proficient in all races as you claim to be, you would be able to give more than just anecdotal evidence. You would have stats on your climb as a Terran player and the decline as your other two races increased. No, you just say "I play more Terran. It's MOAR DIFFICULT!!!11!"
On September 01 2012 03:29 pallad wrote: People that post in this thread should post own battle net account link.. that we all can see , what skill lv they are. 80% of post here sound like bronze-plat players.. its insane.
Maybe I missed it, but where did you post the link to your account?
On September 01 2012 03:13 DebtSC2 wrote: Someone answer me this:
What's wrong with making Zerg and Protoss as difficult as Terran? Obviously at the top level the races can all be competitive, but it's clear that Zerg and Toss players below the top .1% have a much easier time in their matchups than Terran.
It's stupid to make Terran easier or stronger, yes. Very stupid.
It's also stupid to leave Zerg and Protoss the way they are -- virtually microless, with simple, 1 route tech paths.
Yes, 1 route tech path because Terrans don't get barracks -- factory -- starport every game?
Look, Terran requires some more micro, its different than the micro of the other races. Protoss relies on spell micro, terran on large army control, and zerg on positioning. Nothing wrong with asymmetric design.
Except its not asymmetric, its completely lopsided. I play P and Z and T all at the master level, all around 1100 pt in master. I play terran at least twice as much as the other races combined. It is orders of magnitude easier to win with Z and P, because they are vastly simpler mechanically compared to Terran.
It's not asymmetric. For two races it's very easy. For one race its difficult.
so you play all three races, have the same amount of points in master league with all three, and then turn around and say it's completely lopsided? shouldn't you have much less points with terran if that was the case?
it's not about what's easier to do or not. you don't see baseball players debating whether it's harder to pitch or to hit, do you?
WELL, he did say he plays twice as much terran, so you'd expect him to be much better/higher rated with terran. The fact that he's not, in his mind, is an indication that terran is more difficult.
Too many variables still. He could naturally be better at zerg/protoss mechanics. The fact that he plays terran so much also gives him quite a large advantage over other terran players that he would face as Zerg or protoss. He could be playing zerg or protoss after going on a harsh losing streak as terran so his MMR has tanked. These types of variables that can easily be overlooked (and if I wasnt so pressed for time atm i'm sure I could come up with quite a few more easily.) make anecdotal evidence that his argument is based on anything but concrete.
Hmm I guess I can see why Kim made this decision, but does anyone know if the plan to speed up the Raven has been scrapped entirely? Would still be useful, as one second of being out of position and you just lost half your ravens to fungal.
On September 01 2012 03:13 DebtSC2 wrote: Someone answer me this:
What's wrong with making Zerg and Protoss as difficult as Terran? Obviously at the top level the races can all be competitive, but it's clear that Zerg and Toss players below the top .1% have a much easier time in their matchups than Terran.
It's stupid to make Terran easier or stronger, yes. Very stupid.
It's also stupid to leave Zerg and Protoss the way they are -- virtually microless, with simple, 1 route tech paths.
Yes, 1 route tech path because Terrans don't get barracks -- factory -- starport every game?
Look, Terran requires some more micro, its different than the micro of the other races. Protoss relies on spell micro, terran on large army control, and zerg on positioning. Nothing wrong with asymmetric design.
Except its not asymmetric, its completely lopsided. I play P and Z and T all at the master level, all around 1100 pt in master. I play terran at least twice as much as the other races combined. It is orders of magnitude easier to win with Z and P, because they are vastly simpler mechanically compared to Terran.
It's not asymmetric. For two races it's very easy. For one race its difficult.
so you play all three races, have the same amount of points in master league with all three, and then turn around and say it's completely lopsided? shouldn't you have much less points with terran if that was the case?
it's not about what's easier to do or not. you don't see baseball players debating whether it's harder to pitch or to hit, do you?
WELL, he did say he plays twice as much terran, so you'd expect him to be much better/higher rated with terran. The fact that he's not, in his mind, is an indication that terran is more difficult.
well that's the point isn't it? if it's easier to win with protoss or zerg he should be much better with protoss and zerg regardless of how much terran he's played. that's the definition of imbalance.
what it actually shows though is that the race you play doesn't really make a difference as to how well you do - it's completely up to your skill level that dictates whether or not you win or lose.
“ DKIM: Blah, blah, I have to do PR. I could care less what you think but I have to do PR, so blah, blah. Some time back I felt like buffing Ravens but meh. Then I felt like nerfing creep but meh. Oh, the other day MVP won something, so stop whining. “
On September 01 2012 03:13 DebtSC2 wrote: Someone answer me this:
What's wrong with making Zerg and Protoss as difficult as Terran? Obviously at the top level the races can all be competitive, but it's clear that Zerg and Toss players below the top .1% have a much easier time in their matchups than Terran.
It's stupid to make Terran easier or stronger, yes. Very stupid.
It's also stupid to leave Zerg and Protoss the way they are -- virtually microless, with simple, 1 route tech paths.
Yes, 1 route tech path because Terrans don't get barracks -- factory -- starport every game?
Look, Terran requires some more micro, its different than the micro of the other races. Protoss relies on spell micro, terran on large army control, and zerg on positioning. Nothing wrong with asymmetric design.
Except its not asymmetric, its completely lopsided. I play P and Z and T all at the master level, all around 1100 pt in master. I play terran at least twice as much as the other races combined. It is orders of magnitude easier to win with Z and P, because they are vastly simpler mechanically compared to Terran.
It's not asymmetric. For two races it's very easy. For one race its difficult.
so you play all three races, have the same amount of points in master league with all three, and then turn around and say it's completely lopsided? shouldn't you have much less points with terran if that was the case?
it's not about what's easier to do or not. you don't see baseball players debating whether it's harder to pitch or to hit, do you?
WELL, he did say he plays twice as much terran, so you'd expect him to be much better/higher rated with terran. The fact that he's not, in his mind, is an indication that terran is more difficult.
Too many variables still. He could naturally be better at zerg/protoss mechanics. The fact that he plays terran so much also gives him quite a large advantage over other terran players that he would face as Zerg or protoss. He could be playing zerg or protoss after going on a harsh losing streak as terran so his MMR has tanked. These types of variables that can easily be overlooked (and if I wasnt so pressed for time atm i'm sure I could come up with quite a few more easily.) make anecdotal evidence that his argument is based on anything but concrete.
This all could very well be true!
But, I was sharing my experience. It wasn't meant to be end-all, be-all evidence that alone demonstrates Z and P to be less mechanically demanding than T.
Also, the whole 'terran is hard' thing isn't exactly new. I mean, didn't iNcontrol say as much on ITG 48 or 49? Hasn't lack of foreigner terran success been a longstanding thing? I know that Zerg and Protoss aren't "easy." No race in such a competitive is going to award easy wins any farther than the skill of the player will take them.
But in relative terms, from personal experience, I think that Z and P are mechanically 'less difficult' than Terran. They are not "EASY MODE," simply less mechanically demanding. Certain builds/playstyles definitely don't withstand that statement, obviously. A terran who 5 raxes every game against toss is going to have the easier game to play, at least until mid master. A terran that mechs against a zerg using mutalisks and roach drops is going to have the easier game to play. There are ways to play around the "skill gap" issue, though most of them don't hold up at the pro level.
TvZ is more broken than any other matchup at any other time after release. Zerg can rush hive and get an unstoppable army that deal with all terran forces and terrran can just try win by playing alot better on alot of different stages of the game.
While I'd rather they leave the match up alone, their reasoning isn't the most compelling. Don't balance the game around how races did in the most recent tournaments. That's going to be pretty volatile at any reasonable level of balance. Never mind citing MVP at IEM using ravens...
On September 01 2012 03:57 Aristotle7 wrote: TLDR/Translated to English:
“ DKIM: Blah, blah, I have to do PR. I could care less what you think but I have to do PR, so blah, blah. Some time back I felt like buffing Ravens but meh. Then I felt like nerfing creep but meh. Oh, the other day MVP won something, so stop whining. “
Before queen range buff TvZ was evenly balanced especially as players like DRG where pioneering ways to deal with reactor hellions delaying the third. Simcities, roaches were used and despite the cost sank into a set of early game roaches, DRG was using those roaches for good drop defense.
On September 01 2012 04:14 FinalForm wrote: Before queen range buff TvZ was evenly balanced especially as players like DRG where pioneering ways to deal with reactor hellions delaying the third. Simcities, roaches were used and despite the cost sank into a set of early game roaches, DRG was using those roaches for good drop defense.
HoTS is right around the corner. They want Zerg to be the best race, just like Terran was the best at WoL launch. It's all about the business side of things with Blizzard these days.
On September 01 2012 04:14 FinalForm wrote: Before queen range buff TvZ was evenly balanced especially as players like DRG where pioneering ways to deal with reactor hellions delaying the third. Simcities, roaches were used and despite the cost sank into a set of early game roaches, DRG was using those roaches for good drop defense.
Nerchio and Stephano were using Roaches to fend off Hellions for months too.
On September 01 2012 03:49 Penecks wrote: Hmm I guess I can see why Kim made this decision, but does anyone know if the plan to speed up the Raven has been scrapped entirely? Would still be useful, as one second of being out of position and you just lost half your ravens to fungal.
I dont think the raven change would be harmful at all. I don't know if it should be because of fungal, or more of a nudge like warp prisms and OLs and things like that.
This is probably a good change; though the guy on the first page discussing why it was changed in the first place needs to take into account the opinion that tvz was stupid before the patch. Balance aside, tvz being hellions vs either fast 3 base or 2 base tech made tvz very typical and caused lots of random all ins that worked because of chance vs greed. I would never want to go back to before the queen range.
Considering how bad most of the games in Sc2 have become to watch and play with all the changes Blizzard made to the game i don't think this comes as a suprise.
Ravens are a clunky very mediocre spellcaster that has overpriced spells that are extremely unreliable ( range from great to utterly useless ) but for whatever reason this units never got changed to be more reliable. You cannot rely on Ravens to win you a game you will have to rely on your opponent to fucking up to do that for example.
On September 01 2012 03:49 Penecks wrote: Hmm I guess I can see why Kim made this decision, but does anyone know if the plan to speed up the Raven has been scrapped entirely? Would still be useful, as one second of being out of position and you just lost half your ravens to fungal.
I dont think the raven change would be harmful at all. I don't know if it should be because of fungal, or more of a nudge like warp prisms and OLs and things like that.
This is probably a good change; though the guy on the first page discussing why it was changed in the first place needs to take into account the opinion that tvz was stupid before the patch. Balance aside, tvz being hellions vs either fast 3 base or 2 base tech made tvz very typical and caused lots of random all ins that worked because of chance vs greed. I would never want to go back to before the queen range.
But somehow 6 pool drone pull happening to work now is OK?
"We're going to buff ravens" all zerg tears cry and point at how mvp/taeja used them to demolish people. And it may come bite him back in the ass if it turns out raven were just not explored fully.
"We're not going to buff ravens" this thread
tbh I don't know why all the people in this thread are crying zerg imba right now when protoss are GSL 1 style dominating the current meta
haha well I just love the fact that Terran has such good players that it messes with Blizzard's ability to balance the game. I personally am proud of us weakling Terrans! TERRAN HWAITING
How bout we bring back khaidarian amulet and flux vanes then let terrans learn how to deal with them. Funny how they never had problems nerfing protoss
On September 01 2012 01:16 xrapture wrote: He truly is clueless. Mvp and Bomber beat some fucking foreigners at IEM and it proves TvZ is balanced? What a joke.
And I'm guessing he didn't even bother to watch MLG.
LOL past like 4 tournaments in a row Terrans have won and now 1 zerg won an mlg with a terran in second lol dont talk please.
On September 01 2012 04:27 FXO.Slavik wrote: Wise decision by blizzard mb for the first time :D
Even Blizzard confirmed that terrans were lazy whining about balance, when top players like Taeja, MVP etc etc just used something new :D
Exactly they understand how to play their race while other terrans are just doing stupid stuff and then crying about it after sayints its all because of balance.
Seriously? Now we're taking who's streaming as balance indications. Come on, man. (And on the off chance you're being sarcastic, it's still a sad day for TL that I can't tell you apart from people who really do think like that.)
On September 01 2012 01:16 xrapture wrote: He truly is clueless. Mvp and Bomber beat some fucking foreigners at IEM and it proves TvZ is balanced? What a joke.
And I'm guessing he didn't even bother to watch MLG.
LOL past like 4 tournaments in a row Terrans have won and now 1 zerg won an mlg with a terran in second lol dont talk please.
Sure, if you don't count the ones Zerg and Protoss won, then yeah, Terran won all the tournaments since release! Terra OP!
Do remember that they're talking about the highest of competition balance. Not gold, platinum or even masters. Unless you have physically been in a tournament setting and are competing on a wide-scale then Blizzard has already addressed your balance issues in previous patches. This is for the tippy-top of gaming so really almost none of us can really say whether it is right or wrong.
On September 01 2012 01:16 xrapture wrote: He truly is clueless. Mvp and Bomber beat some fucking foreigners at IEM and it proves TvZ is balanced? What a joke.
And I'm guessing he didn't even bother to watch MLG.
LOL past like 4 tournaments in a row Terrans have won and now 1 zerg won an mlg with a terran in second lol dont talk please.
Sure, if you don't count the ones Zerg and Protoss won, then yeah, Terran won all the tournaments since release! Terra OP!
What? are you stupid? I am comfused all I said was terran won the past 4 tournaments in a row... and then u say something really retarded... and terran still has the most GSL wins
I wonder if Dkim realizes, that this always happens? they say they are going to buff the ghost, so we start seeing more ghost play. They say they are nerfing KA, so Protoss stops using templars for awhile. Shit kim, you retarded son? you say you are buffing ravens, so what do you expect? people will try ravens...
This always happens, they announce a balance change and people start experimenting with the unit in question before the patch so that when the patch hits, they already have a build prepared to use the "improved" version.
STOP WORKING ON WOL, THE GAME IS FINE. RELEASE HOTS!
On September 01 2012 04:28 paddyz wrote: How bout we bring back khaidarian amulet and flux vanes then let terrans learn how to deal with them. Funny how they never had problems nerfing protoss
This would be great, except Blizzard's attitude towards protoss has ALWAYS been unfavorable to say the least. Protoss is just destined to be the race of gimmicks. I think Blizzard only included them because their lucky number is 3.
Balancing the game based on tournament results is a really bad way to do this. What if all the top terrans got together and started playing like shit in tourneys, they would know that this would guarantee them a balance boost to their race.
On September 01 2012 04:37 Aveng3r wrote: i still dont like how its really hard to play terran without super crazy apm
When you say play Terran, do you mean casually on ladder or winning in tournaments? Lol.
On September 01 2012 04:37 Fluid wrote: Balancing the game based on tournament results is a really bad way to do this. What if all the top terrans got together and started playing like shit in tourneys, they would know that this would guarantee them a balance boost to their race.
lol? Theres little difference between this and match-fixing. If they want to risk their careers and the sanctity of SC2 as a competition, then sure, roll the dice and hope it works out. The second MVP sets the standard and every other Terran decides to throw, they'll just look at MVP or Taeja and say "well, they're doing okay." -- just as they're doing now.
On September 01 2012 03:49 Penecks wrote: Hmm I guess I can see why Kim made this decision, but does anyone know if the plan to speed up the Raven has been scrapped entirely? Would still be useful, as one second of being out of position and you just lost half your ravens to fungal.
I dont think the raven change would be harmful at all. I don't know if it should be because of fungal, or more of a nudge like warp prisms and OLs and things like that.
This is probably a good change; though the guy on the first page discussing why it was changed in the first place needs to take into account the opinion that tvz was stupid before the patch. Balance aside, tvz being hellions vs either fast 3 base or 2 base tech made tvz very typical and caused lots of random all ins that worked because of chance vs greed. I would never want to go back to before the queen range.
But somehow 6 pool drone pull happening to work now is OK?
I see where you're going. But i think the consequence of an rts is things like unreliable cheeses. If its a 2 player map, maybe 1 rax expo or you could die to a 6 pool drone pull. But the fact remains that on a 4 player map 6 pool drone pull equals luck. The previous design was bad because of lack of scouting all ins, the current design is not nearly asbad because you can punish greed you dont know about yet by 6 pool drone pulling.
On September 01 2012 01:16 xrapture wrote: He truly is clueless. Mvp and Bomber beat some fucking foreigners at IEM and it proves TvZ is balanced? What a joke.
And I'm guessing he didn't even bother to watch MLG.
LOL past like 4 tournaments in a row Terrans have won and now 1 zerg won an mlg with a terran in second lol dont talk please.
Sure, if you don't count the ones Zerg and Protoss won, then yeah, Terran won all the tournaments since release! Terra OP!
What? are you stupid? I am comfused all I said was terran won the past 4 tournaments in a row... and then u say something really retarded... and terran still has the most GSL wins
Have a bit of a scroll through will you? Tell me how much blue you see. Terran has not won the last 4 tournaments. Terran hasn't even won the last 4 major offline events.
On September 01 2012 01:16 xrapture wrote: He truly is clueless. Mvp and Bomber beat some fucking foreigners at IEM and it proves TvZ is balanced? What a joke.
And I'm guessing he didn't even bother to watch MLG.
LOL past like 4 tournaments in a row Terrans have won and now 1 zerg won an mlg with a terran in second lol dont talk please.
Sure, if you don't count the ones Zerg and Protoss won, then yeah, Terran won all the tournaments since release! Terra OP!
What? are you stupid? I am comfused all I said was terran won the past 4 tournaments in a row... and then u say something really retarded... and terran still has the most GSL wins
Have a bit of a scroll through will you? Tell me how much blue you see. Terran has not won the last 4 tournaments. Terran hasn't even won the last 4 major offline events.
On September 01 2012 01:16 xrapture wrote: He truly is clueless. Mvp and Bomber beat some fucking foreigners at IEM and it proves TvZ is balanced? What a joke.
And I'm guessing he didn't even bother to watch MLG.
LOL past like 4 tournaments in a row Terrans have won and now 1 zerg won an mlg with a terran in second lol dont talk please.
Sure, if you don't count the ones Zerg and Protoss won, then yeah, Terran won all the tournaments since release! Terra OP!
What? are you stupid? I am comfused all I said was terran won the past 4 tournaments in a row... and then u say something really retarded... and terran still has the most GSL wins
Have a bit of a scroll through will you? Tell me how much blue you see. Terran has not won the last 4 tournaments. Terran hasn't even won the last 4 major offline events.
On September 01 2012 04:39 kaokentake wrote: WTF? Where is hot bid? holy crap now even blizzard is using the word metagame improperly
swift bans shall be handed out to david kim and dustin browder
I made a blog questioning an expanding definition of omnipresent and used metagame as an example of a word transforming in usage. Everyone disagreed with me and I accepted it. I've been thinkin this for a while now, since no one is complaining about its misusage, its been accepted. Even TL writeups on dota and sc2 use it wrong. Im thinking its becoming more of the common strats
On September 01 2012 01:16 xrapture wrote: He truly is clueless. Mvp and Bomber beat some fucking foreigners at IEM and it proves TvZ is balanced? What a joke.
And I'm guessing he didn't even bother to watch MLG.
LOL past like 4 tournaments in a row Terrans have won and now 1 zerg won an mlg with a terran in second lol dont talk please.
Sure, if you don't count the ones Zerg and Protoss won, then yeah, Terran won all the tournaments since release! Terra OP!
What? are you stupid? I am comfused all I said was terran won the past 4 tournaments in a row... and then u say something really retarded... and terran still has the most GSL wins
Have a bit of a scroll through will you? Tell me how much blue you see. Terran has not won the last 4 tournaments. Terran hasn't even won the last 4 major offline events.
ok, here you go retard. Asus Rog, Mlg summer arena. ESV final, and IEM I hope you feel really stupid right now because u look like u are RETARDED.
Wow, just... wow.
So you are going to leave out WCS Korea, WCS NA, MLG Summer Championship... you know what? Nevermind.
OMG dude ur so stupid I just said past 4 besides MLG read what I say before u say something stupid again and thats still 5 terran wins 1 protoss 2 zergs stop talking kid you dont know anything.
If hsm acted more like irradiate, it have much better use. Count down like proposed widow mine and hit the target. It gives player to react to aoe and snipe important units.
Hmm blizzard really comes off as quite ignorant here. What has late game raven got to do with creep spread? And how can they take Mvp as an example of how the raven is "ok". Great compliment to Mvp thou, you know you are a legend when blizzard balances the game around you When analyzing the games from IEM Cologne they could have asked themselfs why mech play was the winning strategy for terrans (mvp, supernova). Tank/bio is so freaking hard to pull off these days. Im dumbfounded.
I'm glad they are reverting the suggested changes. I felt they were very knee-jerk.
Zerg needed the queen buff to deal with the standard kill all your drones and/or contain you to two base play of Terran. Terran QQ'd a lot and struggled after the buff because they relied on the abuse so much but once they adjusted their meta-game balance returned to where it should be. 3 CC is now the new standard and TvZ is becoming more like PvZ as both T and Z try to out pace the macroing Zerg.
On September 01 2012 01:23 xrapture wrote: Guess he didn't watch any of the Vortix games.
He did really well for a first time showing on the big stage. We will have to see how much better he does against a stronger player pool, but all and all he did very well.
Funny, a friend told me something along the line : "Look at those fucking patch zerg, coming out of nowhere ! Brother of who ? I don't care, look at those fucking creep tumors ! 15 minutes in and still no creep beside the bases ! What a fucking joke."
On September 01 2012 02:20 Sroobz wrote: How come they never talked about DRG NEVER HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH HELLIONS PRE-PATCH? They reference Mvp for the ravens...fucking blizzard. Such a joke
No zerg pro ever had problems with hellions. They were stupidly easy to defend against and while yes, it did force zerg to do a specific early game to defend or die, it's not like it's any different now (6 queen opening anyone?)
Except for when a terran goes reactor hellion and flat out kills all of the zergs drones and wins the game. I'm pretty sure idra and a bunch of pro level zergs wouldn't agree with your statement.
If pro level zergs are dying to reactor hellions, it's literally cause they're out of position and/or played way too greedy/no spines or evo chambers out.
Do you see a pro terran player complaining that they lost to a 4 gate without any bunkers or repair? It's the same idea.
It's actually no where close to the same idea what so ever.
You fail to understand how a unit that cost only minerals, previous patches did significantly more damage than now, and was designed to be a harass unit should not have to be delt with like a 4 gat all in.
Zergs did make spines, had queens in position to block ramp, and had to make roaches (early gas investment into non tech) or rush tech (2 base muta/infestor) and regadless would still often lose to people who just made 10+ hellions and ran past or killed the queen blocking the ramp just as roaches could have possibly spawned. ( in which case you still had to run ALL of your drones to avoid loseing all your economy)
Arguably though, the Overlord speed buff would've fixed this without making the early game extremely boring. The big problem with hellion openers is zerg players didn't know if there were going to be 4-6 hellions or 10-15 hellions, or a hellion/marauder all in. With the overlord speed buff Zerg players could've actually gone into the terran base and seen if it was a typical hellion expand or something way more dangerous. As a result Zerg wouldn't have been stuck making a sim city and praying only 4-6 hellions showed up.
The queen buff + overlord buff made it so Terran can't do any kind of early pressure/denial without risking falling so far behind they essentially just lose the game. As a result Terrans have to be greedy instead, which leads to a giant period of the game where Terran players build 3 OCs and Zerg gets on 3 bases. It's not nearly as fun to watch as Zerg fending off Terran early pressure and then countering/expanding. The fun of TvZ was largely that the match played out on a razor's edge. If you defended poorly you lost lots of drones. If you didn't do enough damage as Terran you'd get baneling busted or you'd be unprepared for incoming mutas and lose tons of scvs. It was back and forth from the first minute. Now it takes anywhere from 6-10 minutes for any actual action to happen in the match. Maybe it's more balanced, but from a spectating point of view the matchup is just a shadow of it's former self.
The interesting here is, Artosis said that, pre-Queen buff TvZ was boring to cast, because that nearly every single time the T would be opening reactor hellion and thus the Queen buff was smart, because it promoted more variety in the beginning.
I don't know I agree with that though...there's been plenty of games where the T would open reactor hellion, and because of that, they just died to a mass roach push. There was still risk even during the days of pre-Queen buff, if you went with reactor hellion.
Terrans before this statement (actually, all players because it was the common sense approach to balance): "I wish Blizzard would stop rushing to patch everything, it leads to stuff like the rushed Thor nerf, they should give time for the meta game to balance out" Terrans now: "I can't believe they're not patching everything THIS INSTANT, did they not see that match I lost on ladder last week? I don't have the APM to use Ravens, this is ridiculous."
That said, I still think they should actually do the/a Raven buff, though not the creep nerf. While I think Terrans are beginning to work out TvZ and the new queens making the latter unneeded, Ravens are still a bit cost/energy-inefficient. While in the end I think winrates will balance out internationally, a small Raven buff will hasten that without being detrimental to balance in the future.
We feel that at this time, we should give players more opportunities to fully explore the slowly-shifting meta-game before we change the balance of the game.
Why didn't you do that before you implemented the queen buff? Blizzard, please avoid micro-managing the balance of the game. Instead, try to use maps to balance to the game, as I think many of us would feel that is a smarter way to adjust balance. The chisel rather than the hammer, if you will.
I like how they actually wait to let the community figure the situation out nowadays before they throw in a new patch and nerf everything into oblivion.
On September 01 2012 04:51 algorithm0r wrote: I'm glad they are reverting the suggested changes. I felt they were very knee-jerk.
Zerg needed the queen buff to deal with the standard kill all your drones and/or contain you to two base play of Terran.
Yep, having proper building placement to prevent Hellions raids and/or making 3 Roaches to fend off said Hellions, get a third and start creep spread was soooo game-breaking that many top Zergs were already doing that.
lol all this terran QQ come on just cuz u cant do 1 simple tanks push and win anymore does not mean is not balance learn to play or get out is hard game and requires time so quit crying and improve and i am toss and my worst match up is pvz and i am mid masters
I'm glad they aren't just buffing this and nerfing that and letting the metagame develop itself. Broodwar was the most imbalanced game at first but after time, people figured out stuff.
maybe the game will balance it self out but I think they should take into consideration the fact that TvZ became much more boring in the early game and PvZ looks very weird with that P all-in/vortex shenanigans
terran was originally balanced at scrub level where 2rax, stim timings, sniping everything, emping everything was totally op and any scrub could do it. these patches filtered out the bads. this is a good thing.
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
It takes one action to use a seeker missile, and mech doesn't take APM fyi... Not sure if you remember the guy who literally chooses what to use every action on (GoOdy)
Do you actually play SC2? Like have you ever actually played a game?
i love how careful they are when nerfing zerg, yet when they nerfed terran, sniped was nerfed by what like 50 percent? why not 15 or 25 percent? same with emp radius?
On September 01 2012 04:58 D_K_night wrote: The interesting here is, Artosis said that, pre-Queen buff TvZ was boring to cast, because that nearly every single time the T would be opening reactor hellion and thus the Queen buff was smart, because it promoted more variety in the beginning.
So much for the variety then, because a new standard simply replaced Reactor Hellion expands as the main opening. Besides, Protoss opens FFE in most of the PvZ games, isn't it “boring to cast” too? Shouldn't be, because FFE has different follow-ups, just like Reactor Hellions expands had different follow-ups.
On September 01 2012 04:58 D_K_night wrote: I don't know I agree with that though...there's been plenty of games where the T would open reactor hellion, and because of that, they just died to a mass roach push. There was still risk even during the days of pre-Queen buff, if you went with reactor hellion.
No, Reactor Hellion expands were safe against pretty much everything with proper reaction, unlike current fast expands → Hellions/Banshees builds that have glaring weaknesses to early Baneling busts, 18 or 28 Roach Warren, etc.
I really like the decision. However the same decision should have been taken before tank nerf, helion nerf, roach buff, thor nerf, queen buff, supply before rax, rax nerf, bunker nerf, raven nerf, reaper nerf, emp nerf, snipe nerf, ghost cost nerf, and so on and so forth.
Well I don't think anyone would argue that at the top level TVZ is more than 55% zerg favored. And if its only 52-53% zerg favored it will take a long time before there is a signifcant shift. Especially since I believe there are more top terran players in korea than other races (as terran was imba at release when a lot of B-teamers shifted to sc2). Anyway lets just forget sc2 vanilla. Its obviously broken as terran is a harder race to play than the two others, and blizzard fixes this in HOTS by in a mech version of the maurauder. Now terran can 1a with mech. Good job blizzard.
On September 01 2012 05:08 Nirel wrote: maybe the game will balance it self out but I think they should take into consideration the fact that TvZ became much more boring in the early game and PvZ looks very weird with that P all-in/vortex shenanigans
I think TvZ is fine early game. TvZ in general seems to be the best matchup overall imho.
PvZ is just bad. So many random allins and such a boring lategame and usually comes down to 1 or 2 huge fights (except for when hero plays maybe). But I feel PvT is similar in that regard. Its just how protoss is designed and what coreunits they have to use (eg. colossi). I don't like it, but don't think you could ever solve that issue without rehauling a lot of that race...some balancechanges won't address that.
On September 01 2012 01:49 operwolf wrote: I am for this decision...allows players to come up with more creative play to overcome certain difficulties for their respective race in the metagame.
This is the same argument terran players used in the beta/early release. Dude, terran has been a much harder race to play forever. Making the raven more reliable isn't gonna change a whole lot.
On September 01 2012 02:20 Sroobz wrote: How come they never talked about DRG NEVER HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH HELLIONS PRE-PATCH? They reference Mvp for the ravens...fucking blizzard. Such a joke
No zerg pro ever had problems with hellions. They were stupidly easy to defend against and while yes, it did force zerg to do a specific early game to defend or die, it's not like it's any different now (6 queen opening anyone?)
Except for when a terran goes reactor hellion and flat out kills all of the zergs drones and wins the game. I'm pretty sure idra and a bunch of pro level zergs wouldn't agree with your statement.
If pro level zergs are dying to reactor hellions, it's literally cause they're out of position and/or played way too greedy/no spines or evo chambers out.
Do you see a pro terran player complaining that they lost to a 4 gate without any bunkers or repair? It's the same idea.
It's actually no where close to the same idea what so ever.
You fail to understand how a unit that cost only minerals, previous patches did significantly more damage than now, and was designed to be a harass unit should not have to be delt with like a 4 gat all in.
Zergs did make spines, had queens in position to block ramp, and had to make roaches (early gas investment into non tech) or rush tech (2 base muta/infestor) and regadless would still often lose to people who just made 10+ hellions and ran past or killed the queen blocking the ramp just as roaches could have possibly spawned. ( in which case you still had to run ALL of your drones to avoid loseing all your economy)
Arguably though, the Overlord speed buff would've fixed this without making the early game extremely boring. The big problem with hellion openers is zerg players didn't know if there were going to be 4-6 hellions or 10-15 hellions, or a hellion/marauder all in. With the overlord speed buff Zerg players could've actually gone into the terran base and seen if it was a typical hellion expand or something way more dangerous. As a result Zerg wouldn't have been stuck making a sim city and praying only 4-6 hellions showed up.
The queen buff + overlord buff made it so Terran can't do any kind of early pressure/denial without risking falling so far behind they essentially just lose the game. As a result Terrans have to be greedy instead, which leads to a giant period of the game where Terran players build 3 OCs and Zerg gets on 3 bases. It's not nearly as fun to watch as Zerg fending off Terran early pressure and then countering/expanding. The fun of TvZ was largely that the match played out on a razor's edge. If you defended poorly you lost lots of drones. If you didn't do enough damage as Terran you'd get baneling busted or you'd be unprepared for incoming mutas and lose tons of scvs. It was back and forth from the first minute. Now it takes anywhere from 6-10 minutes for any actual action to happen in the match. Maybe it's more balanced, but from a spectating point of view the matchup is just a shadow of it's former self.
The interesting here is, Artosis said that, pre-Queen buff TvZ was boring to cast, because that nearly every single time the T would be opening reactor hellion and thus the Queen buff was smart, because it promoted more variety in the beginning.
I don't know I agree with that though...there's been plenty of games where the T would open reactor hellion, and because of that, they just died to a mass roach push. There was still risk even during the days of pre-Queen buff, if you went with reactor hellion.
Yeah now nearly every Terran opens 1 Rax expand everytime instead of Reactor Helion expand wohoo. So much variety.
The game is patched more and more into a 1a turtlefest.
On September 01 2012 02:20 Sroobz wrote: How come they never talked about DRG NEVER HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH HELLIONS PRE-PATCH? They reference Mvp for the ravens...fucking blizzard. Such a joke
No zerg pro ever had problems with hellions. They were stupidly easy to defend against and while yes, it did force zerg to do a specific early game to defend or die, it's not like it's any different now (6 queen opening anyone?)
Except for when a terran goes reactor hellion and flat out kills all of the zergs drones and wins the game. I'm pretty sure idra and a bunch of pro level zergs wouldn't agree with your statement.
If pro level zergs are dying to reactor hellions, it's literally cause they're out of position and/or played way too greedy/no spines or evo chambers out.
Do you see a pro terran player complaining that they lost to a 4 gate without any bunkers or repair? It's the same idea.
It's actually no where close to the same idea what so ever.
You fail to understand how a unit that cost only minerals, previous patches did significantly more damage than now, and was designed to be a harass unit should not have to be delt with like a 4 gat all in.
Zergs did make spines, had queens in position to block ramp, and had to make roaches (early gas investment into non tech) or rush tech (2 base muta/infestor) and regadless would still often lose to people who just made 10+ hellions and ran past or killed the queen blocking the ramp just as roaches could have possibly spawned. ( in which case you still had to run ALL of your drones to avoid loseing all your economy)
Arguably though, the Overlord speed buff would've fixed this without making the early game extremely boring. The big problem with hellion openers is zerg players didn't know if there were going to be 4-6 hellions or 10-15 hellions, or a hellion/marauder all in. With the overlord speed buff Zerg players could've actually gone into the terran base and seen if it was a typical hellion expand or something way more dangerous. As a result Zerg wouldn't have been stuck making a sim city and praying only 4-6 hellions showed up.
The queen buff + overlord buff made it so Terran can't do any kind of early pressure/denial without risking falling so far behind they essentially just lose the game. As a result Terrans have to be greedy instead, which leads to a giant period of the game where Terran players build 3 OCs and Zerg gets on 3 bases. It's not nearly as fun to watch as Zerg fending off Terran early pressure and then countering/expanding. The fun of TvZ was largely that the match played out on a razor's edge. If you defended poorly you lost lots of drones. If you didn't do enough damage as Terran you'd get baneling busted or you'd be unprepared for incoming mutas and lose tons of scvs. It was back and forth from the first minute. Now it takes anywhere from 6-10 minutes for any actual action to happen in the match. Maybe it's more balanced, but from a spectating point of view the matchup is just a shadow of it's former self.
The interesting here is, Artosis said that, pre-Queen buff TvZ was boring to cast, because that nearly every single time the T would be opening reactor hellion and thus the Queen buff was smart, because it promoted more variety in the beginning.
I don't know I agree with that though...there's been plenty of games where the T would open reactor hellion, and because of that, they just died to a mass roach push. There was still risk even during the days of pre-Queen buff, if you went with reactor hellion.
Yeah now nearly every Terran opens 1 Rax expand everytime instead of Reactor Helion expand wohoo. So much variety.
And it always ends with the zerg killing the terran with brood/infestor lol. David Kim turned the most exciting mu in sc2 into the most boring imo.
On September 01 2012 02:20 Sroobz wrote: How come they never talked about DRG NEVER HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH HELLIONS PRE-PATCH? They reference Mvp for the ravens...fucking blizzard. Such a joke
No zerg pro ever had problems with hellions. They were stupidly easy to defend against and while yes, it did force zerg to do a specific early game to defend or die, it's not like it's any different now (6 queen opening anyone?)
Except for when a terran goes reactor hellion and flat out kills all of the zergs drones and wins the game. I'm pretty sure idra and a bunch of pro level zergs wouldn't agree with your statement.
If pro level zergs are dying to reactor hellions, it's literally cause they're out of position and/or played way too greedy/no spines or evo chambers out.
Do you see a pro terran player complaining that they lost to a 4 gate without any bunkers or repair? It's the same idea.
It's actually no where close to the same idea what so ever.
You fail to understand how a unit that cost only minerals, previous patches did significantly more damage than now, and was designed to be a harass unit should not have to be delt with like a 4 gat all in.
Zergs did make spines, had queens in position to block ramp, and had to make roaches (early gas investment into non tech) or rush tech (2 base muta/infestor) and regadless would still often lose to people who just made 10+ hellions and ran past or killed the queen blocking the ramp just as roaches could have possibly spawned. ( in which case you still had to run ALL of your drones to avoid loseing all your economy)
Arguably though, the Overlord speed buff would've fixed this without making the early game extremely boring. The big problem with hellion openers is zerg players didn't know if there were going to be 4-6 hellions or 10-15 hellions, or a hellion/marauder all in. With the overlord speed buff Zerg players could've actually gone into the terran base and seen if it was a typical hellion expand or something way more dangerous. As a result Zerg wouldn't have been stuck making a sim city and praying only 4-6 hellions showed up.
The queen buff + overlord buff made it so Terran can't do any kind of early pressure/denial without risking falling so far behind they essentially just lose the game. As a result Terrans have to be greedy instead, which leads to a giant period of the game where Terran players build 3 OCs and Zerg gets on 3 bases. It's not nearly as fun to watch as Zerg fending off Terran early pressure and then countering/expanding. The fun of TvZ was largely that the match played out on a razor's edge. If you defended poorly you lost lots of drones. If you didn't do enough damage as Terran you'd get baneling busted or you'd be unprepared for incoming mutas and lose tons of scvs. It was back and forth from the first minute. Now it takes anywhere from 6-10 minutes for any actual action to happen in the match. Maybe it's more balanced, but from a spectating point of view the matchup is just a shadow of it's former self.
The interesting here is, Artosis said that, pre-Queen buff TvZ was boring to cast, because that nearly every single time the T would be opening reactor hellion and thus the Queen buff was smart, because it promoted more variety in the beginning.
I don't know I agree with that though...there's been plenty of games where the T would open reactor hellion, and because of that, they just died to a mass roach push. There was still risk even during the days of pre-Queen buff, if you went with reactor hellion.
Yeah now nearly every Terran opens 1 Rax expand everytime instead of Reactor Helion expand wohoo. So much variety.
And it always ends with the zerg killing the terran with brood/infestor lol. David Kim turned the most exciting mu in sc2 into the most boring imo.
And lately I've seen so many terrans just die to some kind of ling / baneling all in or roach all in in mid game that it isn't even funny how one-sided those games are.
On September 01 2012 05:01 Mabukai wrote: I like how they actually wait to let the community figure the situation out nowadays before they throw in a new patch and nerf everything into oblivion.
I would have loved if they had done that before buffing Zergs time and time again.
It wasn't even a particularly massive change. The creep changes were something I would have liked to see. Good creep spreaders (hello there Seal) would still be able to spread it, average players wouldn't have half the map covered.
That said, fair play to Blizzard for letting things settle a bit, and more importantly communicate why they made this decision. We're too often second-guessing their intentions or justifications for things so that's a step in the right direction.
On September 01 2012 02:20 Sroobz wrote: How come they never talked about DRG NEVER HAVING ANY PROBLEMS WITH HELLIONS PRE-PATCH? They reference Mvp for the ravens...fucking blizzard. Such a joke
No zerg pro ever had problems with hellions. They were stupidly easy to defend against and while yes, it did force zerg to do a specific early game to defend or die, it's not like it's any different now (6 queen opening anyone?)
Except for when a terran goes reactor hellion and flat out kills all of the zergs drones and wins the game. I'm pretty sure idra and a bunch of pro level zergs wouldn't agree with your statement.
If pro level zergs are dying to reactor hellions, it's literally cause they're out of position and/or played way too greedy/no spines or evo chambers out.
Do you see a pro terran player complaining that they lost to a 4 gate without any bunkers or repair? It's the same idea.
It's actually no where close to the same idea what so ever.
You fail to understand how a unit that cost only minerals, previous patches did significantly more damage than now, and was designed to be a harass unit should not have to be delt with like a 4 gat all in.
Zergs did make spines, had queens in position to block ramp, and had to make roaches (early gas investment into non tech) or rush tech (2 base muta/infestor) and regadless would still often lose to people who just made 10+ hellions and ran past or killed the queen blocking the ramp just as roaches could have possibly spawned. ( in which case you still had to run ALL of your drones to avoid loseing all your economy)
Arguably though, the Overlord speed buff would've fixed this without making the early game extremely boring. The big problem with hellion openers is zerg players didn't know if there were going to be 4-6 hellions or 10-15 hellions, or a hellion/marauder all in. With the overlord speed buff Zerg players could've actually gone into the terran base and seen if it was a typical hellion expand or something way more dangerous. As a result Zerg wouldn't have been stuck making a sim city and praying only 4-6 hellions showed up.
The queen buff + overlord buff made it so Terran can't do any kind of early pressure/denial without risking falling so far behind they essentially just lose the game. As a result Terrans have to be greedy instead, which leads to a giant period of the game where Terran players build 3 OCs and Zerg gets on 3 bases. It's not nearly as fun to watch as Zerg fending off Terran early pressure and then countering/expanding. The fun of TvZ was largely that the match played out on a razor's edge. If you defended poorly you lost lots of drones. If you didn't do enough damage as Terran you'd get baneling busted or you'd be unprepared for incoming mutas and lose tons of scvs. It was back and forth from the first minute. Now it takes anywhere from 6-10 minutes for any actual action to happen in the match. Maybe it's more balanced, but from a spectating point of view the matchup is just a shadow of it's former self.
The interesting here is, Artosis said that, pre-Queen buff TvZ was boring to cast, because that nearly every single time the T would be opening reactor hellion and thus the Queen buff was smart, because it promoted more variety in the beginning.
I don't know I agree with that though...there's been plenty of games where the T would open reactor hellion, and because of that, they just died to a mass roach push. There was still risk even during the days of pre-Queen buff, if you went with reactor hellion.
Yeah now nearly every Terran opens 1 Rax expand everytime instead of Reactor Helion expand wohoo. So much variety.
And it always ends with the zerg killing the terran with brood/infestor lol. David Kim turned the most exciting mu in sc2 into the most boring imo.
And lately I've seen so many terrans just die to some kind of ling / baneling all in or roach all in in mid game that it isn't even funny how one-sided those games are.
Yeah but shhhhhhhhhhh. We don't want zergs figuring out that making actual units is a good strategy.
I will just say it's quite obvious that they are not paying attention to the metagame/actual games played, otherwise they would have noted the only major use of ravens in tournaments is solely on maps that you can split in half easily such as metropolis which result in 45-1 hr long boring games of Zerg with a 1A deathball and Terran being forced to wait until they have their own super death ball composition and then the game coming down to 1 fight which is ridiculous for the Terran because it is much more difficult for them to acquire and it's ridiculous for spectators because it's no where near what brood war ever was.
It's really disappointing that blizzard are so anti-terran biased that they are only willing to look at 1 tournament result out of almost 20 previous ones which Zergs have all dominated, usually the majority of semi finalists and quarters being Zerg dominated. Not to mention the 2-3 Terran tournament results once again, had almost all Zerg/Protoss finalists with taeja/mvp being the main two Terran winners that people will point out.
Statistics are != (not equal) to balance, nor are they anything to do with the metagame. Any balance designer knows and understands this and will look at how the game is currently being played, and there is a lot of evidence that there is a discrepancy in what blizzard has just announced with the reality that you watch many tournaments nowadays with the Zerg making 20 mistakes, and they are either ahead or still in the game while the Terran makes 1 and loses the game or is all-ined when trying to keep up with the greed of the Zerg.
This announcement is not just disappointing for Terran players, it's disappointing for all SC2 spectators that want a balanced and fair game.
Also, it is quite disheartening to see that blizzard's balance policy when it comes to Terran is:
a) 6 months of Zerg dominating Terran (in an obvious fashion) and they announce they MIGHT fix TvZ balance issues. After only 1 tournament weekend with 1 Terran winner (the other 3/4 semifinalists were Zerg that pushed a 4 time GSL winner to the limit) they decide that everything is fine.
b) After ONE BO5 series with Thorzain, they immediately nerf the thor without letting it "play out" in TvP. c) AFter ONE MLG tournament weekend, they nerf the blue flame hellion without letting it "play out." d) After ONE week or so of Terran players using the ghost lategame to counter Zerg hive tech, it is immediately nerfed, not letting it "play out"
e) Blizzard out of the blue changes TvZ balance by buffing the queen and overlord speed at the same exact time.
So now, you are telling Terran players, and the entire SC2 spectator population that after 6-7 months now of Terran being facestomped into the ground, that after 1 tournament win from MVP (in which he was pushed to the limit by previously unknown Zergs that claim to practice on the ladder 2 hrs per day, MVP is a 4 time GSL champion) they are announcing that Terran is "fine?"
Something is wrong here.
I approve this message.
p.s. if other pro/known Terrans are going to hide in their caves and "let avilo do the whining aka balance feedback for us" you should be ashamed. The rest of you know how ludicrous this recent announcement is. Have some balls please.
On September 01 2012 05:29 avilo wrote: I will just say it's quite obvious that they are not paying attention to the metagame/actual games played, otherwise they would have noted the only major use of ravens in tournaments is solely on maps that you can split in half easily such as metropolis which result in 45-1 hr long boring games of Zerg with a 1A deathball and Terran being forced to wait until they have their own super death ball composition and then the game coming down to 1 fight which is ridiculous for the Terran because it is much more difficult for them to acquire and it's ridiculous for spectators because it's no where near what brood war ever was.
It's really disappointing that blizzard are so anti-terran biased that they are only willing to look at 1 tournament result out of almost 20 previous ones which Zergs have all dominated, usually the majority of semi finalists and quarters being Zerg dominated. Not to mention the 2-3 Terran tournament results once again, had almost all Zerg/Protoss finalists with taeja/mvp being the main two Terran winners that people will point out.
Statistics are != (not equal) to balance, nor are they anything to do with the metagame. Any balance designer knows and understands this and will look at how the game is currently being played, and there is a lot of evidence that there is a discrepancy in what blizzard has just announced with the reality that you watch many tournaments nowadays with the Zerg making 20 mistakes, and they are either ahead or still in the game while the Terran makes 1 and loses the game or is all-ined when trying to keep up with the greed of the Zerg.
This announcement is not just disappointing for Terran players, it's disappointing for all SC2 spectators that want a balanced and fair game.
I approve this message.
I have to lay low on my balance complaining for a while. But Avilo, I also approve your message.
On September 01 2012 03:13 DebtSC2 wrote: Someone answer me this:
What's wrong with making Zerg and Protoss as difficult as Terran? Obviously at the top level the races can all be competitive, but it's clear that Zerg and Toss players below the top .1% have a much easier time in their matchups than Terran.
It's stupid to make Terran easier or stronger, yes. Very stupid.
It's also stupid to leave Zerg and Protoss the way they are -- virtually microless, with simple, 1 route tech paths.
Yes, 1 route tech path because Terrans don't get barracks -- factory -- starport every game?
Look, Terran requires some more micro, its different than the micro of the other races. Protoss relies on spell micro, terran on large army control, and zerg on positioning. Nothing wrong with asymmetric design.
Except its not asymmetric, its completely lopsided. I play P and Z and T all at the master level, all around 1100 pt in master. I play terran at least twice as much as the other races combined. It is orders of magnitude easier to win with Z and P, because they are vastly simpler mechanically compared to Terran.
It's not asymmetric. For two races it's very easy. For one race its difficult.
so you play all three races, have the same amount of points in master league with all three, and then turn around and say it's completely lopsided? shouldn't you have much less points with terran if that was the case?
it's not about what's easier to do or not. you don't see baseball players debating whether it's harder to pitch or to hit, do you?
WELL, he did say he plays twice as much terran, so you'd expect him to be much better/higher rated with terran. The fact that he's not, in his mind, is an indication that terran is more difficult.
Too many variables still. He could naturally be better at zerg/protoss mechanics. The fact that he plays terran so much also gives him quite a large advantage over other terran players that he would face as Zerg or protoss. He could be playing zerg or protoss after going on a harsh losing streak as terran so his MMR has tanked. These types of variables that can easily be overlooked (and if I wasnt so pressed for time atm i'm sure I could come up with quite a few more easily.) make anecdotal evidence that his argument is based on anything but concrete.
This all could very well be true!
But, I was sharing my experience. It wasn't meant to be end-all, be-all evidence that alone demonstrates Z and P to be less mechanically demanding than T.
Also, the whole 'terran is hard' thing isn't exactly new. I mean, didn't iNcontrol say as much on ITG 48 or 49? Hasn't lack of foreigner terran success been a longstanding thing? I know that Zerg and Protoss aren't "easy." No race in such a competitive is going to award easy wins any farther than the skill of the player will take them.
But in relative terms, from personal experience, I think that Z and P are mechanically 'less difficult' than Terran. They are not "EASY MODE," simply less mechanically demanding. Certain builds/playstyles definitely don't withstand that statement, obviously. A terran who 5 raxes every game against toss is going to have the easier game to play, at least until mid master. A terran that mechs against a zerg using mutalisks and roach drops is going to have the easier game to play. There are ways to play around the "skill gap" issue, though most of them don't hold up at the pro level.
I think you might of misunderstood the intent of that post. I wasn't directing it at you really as much as the couple of other people who were saying that your experience strongly suggested an imbalance. As for your view of the different races in terms of difficulty I would describe them as follows:
Terran has the heighest skill ceiling in the game. The amount of micro that terrans are able to utilized absolutely dwarfs the other two races by comparison. This indirectly suggests that terran should be the hardest race to play(More on that in a later.) at the highest levels of skill while terrans at the same time have the most forgiving mechanics in the game out of the three races. This is something you can easily see if you compare how mules/scans/supply call down to larva injection for zerg and chrono boost for protoss. Now if you look at how production works for terran compared to protoss zerg and at the non pro level you'll see the same trend continuing. The best way to explain this is to compare it directly to each race seperately.
terran production vs zerg production: Terrans production basically work on a rhythm where you are constantly creating units over time. While the zergs production works by jumping between offensive and defensive units in a way thats based on reaction. The reason why this means terran production is harsher than zerg production is because if a terran needs to spend his focus in the game on micro or something besides macro he can queue up units if he wants to. This by itself isn't major but it is a factor and shouldn't be ignored and while its not optimal we still see even mid level pros doing this from time to time. The second(and more important) reason is that if a terran does mess up on a round of units they will be at a small army disadvantage while if a zerg makes a mistake and pumps drones when they should of made an army it will likely be the reason why the zerg will lose (or vica versa for needing to make drones and he ends up making an army.). On top of this you have the majority of your potential economy or army is ultimately linked to landing injections on time and because you can't queue injections or inject on the same hatchery twice the ability to produce units is is severely hampered if you make a mistake. We're not talking about a 10% difference here either if a zerg misses a full round of injections thats 50% of the zergs potential strength in an army or in his economy is lost during that time.
(err i'm running out of time again so i'll skip the terran mechanics vs protoss mechanics section and edit later. I'll just give my main argument here.)
Because terrans not only have the most options when it comes to micro but also the most effective options of it if you made the race as strong as the other two races while ignoring micro/positioning and things like that the second the terrans started to utilize their potential micro the race would become completely imbalanced due to the higher skill cap. To combat this the terrans have mechanics that are less punishing if not used to help allow terrans to focus on the micro they need to do to win.
TLDR version: you're microing harder but the protoss and zerg are macroing harder (when it comes to in game focus of the players.). because of this it gives the impression that the game is easier for protoss than zerg because just like 99% of RTS players you're focusing too much on the fighting side of things and not focusing enough on the logistics side.
Even as a zerg player, I would like to have seen changes to creep spread. I think that generally slowing it down a bit and causing it to dissapate faster would have been nice, subtle changes that would have made late game tvz more interesting. Zergs are so good at spreading creep that creep spread just feels a bit "abusive" to me but that's not a good reason to nerf something by itself. If they made ravens a bit cheaper and take less time to build I think more Terrans would spring for them earlier and that it would make the tvz match more interesting.
I think people should give Blizzard a break here. By any standard even up to pro level the game is balanced extremely well. For sure it's hard for David Kim to understand all the super high level subtleties because he's not a pro. He does though have access to way more information than any of us so I think people should state their case but give David Kim some credit.
I think that balance discussing and "whining" is draining the love of SC2 and the energy of gamers. Just chill out and open SC2 ladder and get laddering instead of thinking of Theorycraft all day long.
On September 01 2012 05:36 The_Darkness wrote: Even as a zerg player, I would like to have seen changes to creep spread. I think that generally slowing it down a bit and causing it to dissapate faster would have been nice, subtle changes that would have made late game tvz more interesting. Zergs are so good at spreading creep that creep spread just feels a bit "abusive" to me but that's not a good reason to nerf something by itself. If they made ravens a bit cheaper and take less time to build I think more Terrans would spring for them earlier and that it would make the tvz match more interesting.
Increasing creep recede speed is something I remember DeMusliM suggesting on his stream, it would be the right approach to changing creep if that would be necessary in my opinion. Right now it takes 60 seconds for OL creep to recede and 120 seconds for a single creep tumor to recede, both take a long time in fast-paced RTS like SC2.
So they nerf Terran in a hasty and reactionary fashion every few months but take their sweet time deciding whether to nerf Zerg a bit but ultimately decide against it because the best player in the world beats some Euro patchzergs and Gumiho lights up Slayers one night. The fuck is going on here?
david kim and bilzzard are doing a great job not over-reacting to every "chicken little" in this thread claiming the sky is falling.
They've done such a great job with WoL that I'm voting with my wallet and buying the Collector's Edition of HotS. However, I suspect Blizzard will have a much harder time selling HotS Collector's Editions this time around.
On September 01 2012 01:16 xrapture wrote: He truly is clueless. Mvp and Bomber beat some fucking foreigners at IEM and it proves TvZ is balanced? What a joke. And I'm guessing he didn't even bother to watch MLG.
That's some seriously flawed logic by Blizzard imo, even as a Zerg I was willing to accept that those changes would be balanced, then people use Ravens in just a couple of games and they decide not to go through with it...
All this flaming on Blizzard is absolutely beyond me. How can you guys think that you know more about the game, than people who do it for a freakin living. These Blizzard guys have all the stats readily available and watch ALL the tournaments. Why some people think that the whole matchup is imba because they've been struggling lately is simply put, outrageous. Blizzard cares, and they play their own games. That's what makes them so great and that's why they work so darn hard at it.
On September 01 2012 05:54 BlackPride wrote: All this flaming on Blizzard is absolutely beyond me. How can you guys think that you know more about the game, than people who do it for a freakin living.
Were they doing it for free when Roaches were 1 supply, or Warpgate research was 60 seconds, or BFH dealt 24 damage to Light units, or when KA still existed? No, eh? So seems like earning money from doing something doesn't guarantee you're good at it...
On September 01 2012 05:44 BuddhaMonk wrote: I think people should give Blizzard a break here. By any standard even up to pro level the game is balanced extremely well. For sure it's hard for David Kim to understand all the super high level subtleties because he's not a pro. He does though have access to way more information than any of us so I think people should state their case but give David Kim some credit.
Actually he is really quite insane at the game. He can blame only himself for listening to the community and nerfed stuff that shouldn't have been nerfed. Now the game is all sorts of broken, but again he designed this thing, he knows better than anyone what is actually OP.
I'm a masters terran, and I'm sick of losing against zerg. I would love a buff. BUT, and this is the big problem blizzard faces, ANY buff they can give terran that could actually help terrans (other than the top Koreans) could be easily abused by Taeja, MVP, Pot, MVP, among others, thereby making them unbeatable. There is no obvious way of making the game balanced for the mortal terrans without making the few top terrans unbeatable.
I really hate the way they deal with terran problems: terran always has to find micro solutions while the other races are just buffed.
111 too strong? Immortal gets better range. Hellion openers too hard to deal with as zerg? Queen more range.
Zerg army too hard to deal with in the late game and too easy to get for the zerg? Use your ravens better. pff
ravens do not only need a buff for tvz, they could be useful in the other matchups as well if they werent so slow and easy to snipe... they cost 200 gas and are a light unit wtf...
On September 01 2012 06:01 Vague wrote: I'm a masters terran, and I'm sick of losing against zerg. I would love a buff. BUT, and this is the big problem blizzard faces, ANY buff they can give terran that could actually help terrans (other than the top Koreans) could be easily abused by Taeja, MVP, Pot, MVP, among others, thereby making them unbeatable. There is no obvious way of making the game balanced for the mortal terrans without making the few top terrans unbeatable.
On September 01 2012 05:54 BlackPride wrote: All this flaming on Blizzard is absolutely beyond me. How can you guys think that you know more about the game, than people who do it for a freakin living.
Were they doing it for free when Roaches were 1 supply, or Warpgate research was 60 seconds, or BFH dealt 24 damage to Light units, or when KA still existed? No, eh? So seems like earning money from doing something doesn't guarantee you're good at it...
nothign is stopping you from making your own MOD of the game... hell Blizzard will even promote it in their "Arcade".
On September 01 2012 06:01 Vague wrote: I'm a masters terran, and I'm sick of losing against zerg. I would love a buff. BUT, and this is the big problem blizzard faces, ANY buff they can give terran that could actually help terrans (other than the top Koreans) could be easily abused by Taeja, MVP, Pot, MVP, among others, thereby making them unbeatable. There is no obvious way of making the game balanced for the mortal terrans without making the few top terrans unbeatable.
Not buffing terran, but nerfing zerg perhaps? The creep recede speed is a good place to start.
On September 01 2012 05:54 BlackPride wrote: All this flaming on Blizzard is absolutely beyond me. How can you guys think that you know more about the game, than people who do it for a freakin living.
Were they doing it for free when Roaches were 1 supply, or Warpgate research was 60 seconds, or BFH dealt 24 damage to Light units, or when KA still existed? No, eh? So seems like earning money from doing something doesn't guarantee you're good at it...
nothign is stopping you from making your own MOD of the game... hell Blizzard will even promote it in their "Arcade".
What would be really interesting would be a mod that lets you select what patch you'd like to play in. Like you'd be able to play with Overseers casting Frenzy and EMP with like 9 radius or whatever it had.
Bliz: Hey Terran we are finally going to buff you a bit again! T: YAAAAY Bliz: Not!
T:
Oh come on, despite tournament results they cannot seriously believe that the slightest buff to ravens and the tiniest nerf to creep spread would truly shift anything? It would only serve to keep the metagame fresh, which is a good thing right?
On September 01 2012 06:01 Vague wrote: I'm a masters terran, and I'm sick of losing against zerg. I would love a buff. BUT, and this is the big problem blizzard faces, ANY buff they can give terran that could actually help terrans (other than the top Koreans) could be easily abused by Taeja, MVP, Pot, MVP, among others, thereby making them unbeatable. There is no obvious way of making the game balanced for the mortal terrans without making the few top terrans unbeatable.
Find a zerg that you think is the same skill level as you, but still stomps you, message him and ask if you can practice against them. Keep doing this and look at your replays until you figure out where the holes in your play are. Become more than mortal.
On September 01 2012 06:01 Vague wrote: I'm a masters terran, and I'm sick of losing against zerg. I would love a buff. BUT, and this is the big problem blizzard faces, ANY buff they can give terran that could actually help terrans (other than the top Koreans) could be easily abused by Taeja, MVP, Pot, MVP, among others, thereby making them unbeatable. There is no obvious way of making the game balanced for the mortal terrans without making the few top terrans unbeatable.
mvp/polt/mkp/taeja imba
I think you mean Mvp and well no one else ... polt is not, and never has been an amazing player. Mkp performed well for a while with amazing micro, kinda not doing so hot anymore. Same for Taeja, had a pretty good killing spree, kinda not as hot now, lost to IM.Seed at IPL and IM.First in TSL4. Mvp is really the only player to consistently dominate throughout his sc2 career. And Gumiho, he all killed Slayers? awesome, how is he doing now? yeah .... Even these top terrans are still having a hard time winning, and somehow this equates to terran performing really well? wtf, am I even watching the same games?
On September 01 2012 06:01 Vague wrote: I'm a masters terran, and I'm sick of losing against zerg. I would love a buff. BUT, and this is the big problem blizzard faces, ANY buff they can give terran that could actually help terrans (other than the top Koreans) could be easily abused by Taeja, MVP, Pot, MVP, among others, thereby making them unbeatable. There is no obvious way of making the game balanced for the mortal terrans without making the few top terrans unbeatable.
Not buffing terran, but nerfing zerg perhaps? The creep recede speed is a good place to start.
Same thing; if you nerf zerg in a way that can actually help the mortal terrans, the imortal terrans will find a way to abuse it . Reducing creep spread just a bit won't really help anyone, and reducing it enough to make a difference is too much reduction at the top level.
Yet despite this- there is not a SINGLE korean terran who qualified for WCS World.... Infact, there are barely any terrans that have qualifiers for WCS World..
I agree with blizzards decision to not buff ravens. I think they already are extremely powerful lategame, and the problem lies in actually getting them. I think increasing creep receeding speed would improve the matchup and allow more timing pushes again, making it harder for zergs to "rush" to hive tech.
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
It takes one action to use a seeker missile, and mech doesn't take APM fyi... Not sure if you remember the guy who literally chooses what to use every action on (GoOdy)
The thing is though, how do we get in range to use seeker missile if you spam fungal growth?
On September 01 2012 06:01 Vague wrote: I'm a masters terran, and I'm sick of losing against zerg. I would love a buff. BUT, and this is the big problem blizzard faces, ANY buff they can give terran that could actually help terrans (other than the top Koreans) could be easily abused by Taeja, MVP, Pot, MVP, among others, thereby making them unbeatable. There is no obvious way of making the game balanced for the mortal terrans without making the few top terrans unbeatable.
mvp/polt/mkp/taeja imba
I think you mean Mvp and well no one else ... polt is not, and never has been an amazing player. Mkp performed well for a while with amazing micro, kinda not doing so hot anymore. Same for Taeja, had a pretty good killing spree, kinda not as hot now, lost to IM.Seed at IPL and IM.First in TSL4. Mvp is really the only player to consistently dominate throughout his sc2 career. And Gumiho, he all killed Slayers? awesome, how is he doing now? yeah .... Even these top terrans are still having a hard time winning, and somehow this equates to terran performing really well? wtf, am I even watching the same games?
Whoa, Taeja you are saying lost to IM.Seed in IPL and that somehow is bad? You can't be talking about the 7 game winning streak he head where he lost to Seed after beating him the first time around and 6 other players. We can't be watching the same games.
I think terrans need to find a way to counter Broodlord with ravens. On some maps MVP already pulls it off. But there should be more waiting. Remember Toss vs Mutas...they even wanted to make a special anti-unit, but now it is a non-issue. I think it's the same story with terran vs zerg.
On September 01 2012 06:21 testthewest wrote: I think terrans need to find a way to counter Broodlord with ravens. On some maps MVP already pulls it off. But there should be more waiting. Remember Toss vs Mutas...they even wanted to make a special anti-unit, but now it is a non-issue. I think it's the same story with terran vs zerg.
From what I have seen, pro terrans have used the raven with HSM to take out infestors, which are the back bone of the late game army. It only takes one or two HSM to do some pretty insane damage to the infestors and the BL without the fungles to back them up.
Yeah it feels really right this way, terran buff ? No way this could be happening............................................................. * my terran tears are dropping *
On September 01 2012 06:01 Vague wrote: I'm a masters terran, and I'm sick of losing against zerg. I would love a buff. BUT, and this is the big problem blizzard faces, ANY buff they can give terran that could actually help terrans (other than the top Koreans) could be easily abused by Taeja, MVP, Pot, MVP, among others, thereby making them unbeatable. There is no obvious way of making the game balanced for the mortal terrans without making the few top terrans unbeatable.
mvp/polt/mkp/taeja imba
I think you mean Mvp and well no one else ... polt is not, and never has been an amazing player. Mkp performed well for a while with amazing micro, kinda not doing so hot anymore. Same for Taeja, had a pretty good killing spree, kinda not as hot now, lost to IM.Seed at IPL and IM.First in TSL4. Mvp is really the only player to consistently dominate throughout his sc2 career. And Gumiho, he all killed Slayers? awesome, how is he doing now? yeah .... Even these top terrans are still having a hard time winning, and somehow this equates to terran performing really well? wtf, am I even watching the same games?
Hmmm, perhaps I should say Mvp and whatever terran that is hot at the moment. It's hard to stay at the top level, but players like MKP and Taeja can get there for some time, even if they cannot be consistently at the top.
On September 01 2012 06:01 Vague wrote: I'm a masters terran, and I'm sick of losing against zerg. I would love a buff. BUT, and this is the big problem blizzard faces, ANY buff they can give terran that could actually help terrans (other than the top Koreans) could be easily abused by Taeja, MVP, Pot, MVP, among others, thereby making them unbeatable. There is no obvious way of making the game balanced for the mortal terrans without making the few top terrans unbeatable.
Find a zerg that you think is the same skill level as you, but still stomps you, message him and ask if you can practice against them. Keep doing this and look at your replays until you figure out where the holes in your play are. Become more than mortal.
I have no intention to become more than mortal in this game. This is my hobby, not my profession...
TvZ is getting more and more interesting. I say that as a mid-master Zerg player who has experienced the shifts first hand on ladder. It is a dynamic, exciting match up again.
I also say this as a fan and spectator. Are the whiners just choosing not to acknowledge that Terran is actually doing just fine at the highest level? Not sure we should be doing anything but thanking Blizzard for their cautious approach to balance.
Player skill, experimentation and time can solve many perceived balance issues. We are seeing that happening at this very moment with Terrans. Unfortunately, it leaves many mud leaguers behind to bitch and whine about perceived imbalances from about 2 months ago.
GJ Blizzard. Looking forward to seeing continued adaptations from T.
This is absurd..... Nestea, losira, drg, symbol, and Stephano were absolutely dominating s everyone before, if we want to use this stupid logic about how a few players are doing good in the matchup, then why was Zerg buffed before???? Nestea, losira, drg, symbol, and Stephano were doing just fine......
Regardless of balance discussion, I like how this show the metagame evolution.
Proposing a buff for a unit without actually implementing it resulted in more interest and research about this unit. Players trained with it, found a potential, exploited it and made the unit stronger and the buff useless. Blizzard's intention actually resolved the problem, the buff didn't.
This is kind of ironic. Do we really need balance patch if we have never ending shifts in the metagame ?
I am really concerned that Blizzard simply looks at win-loss statistics and says "looks good guys sorry!".
Here is what has happened:
LESSER ZERGS have risen up to play MUCH BETTER Terrans because of the matchup issues. MVP and Bomber naturally take these foreigner zergs apart. And VIOLA! We have balance.
This is really really really silly. It really surprises me that Kim plays random and does not understand how obviously screwed up this matchup is. After seeing that they do not take into consideration that it is taking better Terran players to beat worse zerg players, I really am going to consider a race switch in the xpack.
There truly seems to be an anti-Terran bias at Blizzard (it is almost as obvious when you hear Browder talk as it is when you listen to Wheat cast).
This really does not seem hard to understand at all. This seems to me like common sense. The matchup percentage will *ALWAYS* shift to 50-50 once the lesser players start to make their way up into the tournament ranks if there is a major match-up issue. You can not simply use W's and L's as a balance test, because no matter what, much like on ladder, it will always eventually shift back into 50-50. This just seems like really simple common sense and it is completely ignored by Blizzard.
EDIT: I would like to add that they also are ignoring the fact that Terrans are doing crazy risky builds to get these W's much of the time. If you do a 1 rax fast 3rd CC on ladder, you will get smashed. These tournament guys are meta gaming the other PLAYER, not the match-up. UGH this all seems so simple, how can they completely ignore these points?
EDIT 2: If they do want to simply use W's and L's the matchup was PERFECTLY FINE before they buffed zerg!!! *Shoots himself*
On September 01 2012 01:16 xrapture wrote: He truly is clueless. Mvp and Bomber beat some fucking foreigners at IEM and it proves TvZ is balanced? What a joke.
And I'm guessing he didn't even bother to watch MLG.
Sorry for replying to this so late, but, seriously.. we need to create a rule that calls for an instant-ban on everyone who calls David Kim "clueless".. Criticizing his decision is fine, but calling him clueless is just facepalm-worthy.
On September 01 2012 06:01 Vague wrote: I'm a masters terran, and I'm sick of losing against zerg. I would love a buff. BUT, and this is the big problem blizzard faces, ANY buff they can give terran that could actually help terrans (other than the top Koreans) could be easily abused by Taeja, MVP, Pot, MVP, among others, thereby making them unbeatable. There is no obvious way of making the game balanced for the mortal terrans without making the few top terrans unbeatable.
Find a zerg that you think is the same skill level as you, but still stomps you, message him and ask if you can practice against them. Keep doing this and look at your replays until you figure out where the holes in your play are. Become more than mortal.
I have no intention to become more than mortal in this game. This is my hobby, not my profession...
Nothing about what I said above requires you to become a professional at the game. You do not need to become as good as Taeja to beat a mid-masters zerg.
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
It takes one action to use a seeker missile, and mech doesn't take APM fyi... Not sure if you remember the guy who literally chooses what to use every action on (GoOdy)
The thing is though, how do we get in range to use seeker missile if you spam fungal growth?
The same way infestors are able to use fungle growth even though seige tanks out range it?
On September 01 2012 06:01 Vague wrote: I'm a masters terran, and I'm sick of losing against zerg. I would love a buff. BUT, and this is the big problem blizzard faces, ANY buff they can give terran that could actually help terrans (other than the top Koreans) could be easily abused by Taeja, MVP, Pot, MVP, among others, thereby making them unbeatable. There is no obvious way of making the game balanced for the mortal terrans without making the few top terrans unbeatable.
Find a zerg that you think is the same skill level as you, but still stomps you, message him and ask if you can practice against them. Keep doing this and look at your replays until you figure out where the holes in your play are. Become more than mortal.
I have no intention to become more than mortal in this game. This is my hobby, not my profession...
Nothing about what I said above requires you to become a professional at the game. You do not need to become as good as Taeja to beat a mid-masters zerg.
Oh, we are using the "mortal" metaphor in different ways. By "mortal terrans" I meant all the NA, EU, and most of the KR terrans....
On September 01 2012 06:21 testthewest wrote: I think terrans need to find a way to counter Broodlord with ravens. On some maps MVP already pulls it off. But there should be more waiting. Remember Toss vs Mutas...they even wanted to make a special anti-unit, but now it is a non-issue. I think it's the same story with terran vs zerg.
From what I have seen, pro terrans have used the raven with HSM to take out infestors, which are the back bone of the late game army. It only takes one or two HSM to do some pretty insane damage to the infestors and the BL without the fungles to back them up.
HSM doesn't do that much damage you need to hit with at least 3 preferably 4 or even more. The splash radius is not very big unless you basically have everything cuddling you won't lose much. You don't even need big splits like against Vortex . Just don't make your units fly through eachother and you are fine.
"We feel that at this time, we should give players more opportunities to fully explore the slowly-shifting meta-game before we change the balance of the game. We’re seeing a lot more players starting to explore Ravens, and we’d like to see exactly how that goes before making any decisions on balance. The TvZ win ratio has somewhat shifted toward terran, calling a nerf to creep tumor into question."
For all the whiners in this thread: it's all about this part. Meta-game has shifted a bit. Before breaking the game with a patch countering patch, they wait and see what happens on the long run with the old patch. They are open to changes.
In other parts, he tries to explain that these shifts were observed in recent tournaments. Note that he does not say anything about the tvz match-up except that it changes, which is correct, imo. In their eyes, the shift has been in the desired direction and they have postponed short term balance changes. So everyone saying blizzard thinks tvz is balanced because 'mvp and bomber beat some fucking foreigners at iem' as i saw someone post on the 1st page, is just an idiot.
and last, all terran platinum, diamond and masters whiners, the suggested changes were for prolevel, not below that. I don't care how many races avilo has in master, the patch most probably won't be for him.
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
It takes one action to use a seeker missile, and mech doesn't take APM fyi... Not sure if you remember the guy who literally chooses what to use every action on (GoOdy)
The thing is though, how do we get in range to use seeker missile if you spam fungal growth?
The same way infestors are able to use fungle growth even though seige tanks out range it?
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
It takes one action to use a seeker missile, and mech doesn't take APM fyi... Not sure if you remember the guy who literally chooses what to use every action on (GoOdy)
The thing is though, how do we get in range to use seeker missile if you spam fungal growth?
Fungal does 30 damage to a raven, which has 140 hp, and costs 75 energy. If he fungals you, you don't shoot a missile, but you don't die either. You shouldn't let more than 1 to 2 ravens get hit by one fungal, and you should prevent Infestors from getting too close by using auto turrets, which are immune to fungal and have range 7, with a build range of 3. Auto turrets are also immune to seeker missiles.
Infestors have very low HP and can be easily zoned out by using Auto turrets, and destroyed outright or chased away by using seeker missiles. All other Zerg AA is incredibly vulnerable to PDD, other than Hydras, which get eaten alive by Marines and Hellions, and Missiles off creep.
Huh how odd. I read this and reacted positively that blizzard were more closely watching the situation. That they're aware the meta and shifts faster than they can patch typically. Most terran players have clearly had an improved shift in tvz over the last month.
But I guess blizzard shouldn't watch the metagame. Just read the blind hate on forums. That's where the real important balance designers and metagame leaders are!
On September 01 2012 01:24 TechNoTrance wrote: People whine when blizz makes changes too quickly without enough testing. People whine when blizz is patient and careful about making changes with a fair amount of testing.
Standard.
People complain when Blizzard makes stupid and unnecessary changes to a good match-up. People complain when Blizzard refuses to adress the various problems created by said changes.
Fixed.
So much bias in one post. Thanks for proving my point.
Yep, I guess even pros Zergs stating that Queen buff was unnecessary and made Zerg favored in ZvT are biased towards Terran. Makes a lot of sense.
Who? Stephano says ZvT is 50-50 in his opinion. I'd say he's a pretty high level and qualified person to make that comment.
All we have here are for the most part a bunch of Terran ladder players ranging from very low level to semi-decent bitching about balance... Not really anything constructive going on -- just a lot of David Kim hating and bashing. What's wrong with just letting things play out for several more months before deciding "Terran UP Zerg OP"
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
It takes one action to use a seeker missile, and mech doesn't take APM fyi... Not sure if you remember the guy who literally chooses what to use every action on (GoOdy)
The thing is though, how do we get in range to use seeker missile if you spam fungal growth?
The same way infestors are able to use fungle growth even though seige tanks out range it?
Thats not really the same deal, since Siege Tank attacks aren't spells that immobilize.
The whole immobilization aspect of Fungal Growth just kind of absolutely sucks and is mediocre design, I understand that it probably WON'T be changed assuming HotS isn't a long ways out, but I hope that somewhere down the line spells like Fungal Growth and totally eliminate micro are stripped from the game.
Ravens are fine as a unit until... they're stopped from moving and casting their spells.
Personally I think its fine that Blizzard is taking a more wait-and-see approach to balance, and from what I've seen in the past didn't many people say they'd rather see that than the more frequent patching?
ravens are only powerful if you can get to them. it's so easy to just straight out die when you're investing so much money into starports and the raven upgrades, and waiting for enough ravens, and for the ravens to accumulate enough energy to become effective.
they're only good in the stagnant position, when both sides are afraid to attack the other.
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
It takes one action to use a seeker missile, and mech doesn't take APM fyi... Not sure if you remember the guy who literally chooses what to use every action on (GoOdy)
The thing is though, how do we get in range to use seeker missile if you spam fungal growth?
The same way infestors are able to use fungle growth even though seige tanks out range it?
By having broodlords to force the infestors to unsiege?
I haven't seen IEM, was on vacation, but recent TvZ play (MLG summer, recent GSL) seems to be centered mainly around destroying the zerg before the very lategame. I personally have no real problem with that if winrates are fairly balanced during that time, except that it makes for generic gameplay.
WCS in NA and EU are unfair tournaments given how close to the patch they were. Those directly benefited only zergs and forced terrans to try and use strategies and builds that were from pre-patch. This led to some zerg favored results. GSL and NASl will provide much clearer indications of balance than WCS.
That's interesting, but to really understand what was going on we'll want to compare things to the winrates BEFORE the buff. For all we know, zerg winrates overall actually went down! I mean, they didn't, but all this chart tells us is "zerg wins a lot". What it doesn't tell us is whether or not this was effected by the queen buff.
ravens are only powerful if you can get to them. it's so easy to just straight out die when you're investing so much money into starports and the raven upgrades, and waiting for enough ravens, and for the ravens to accumulate enough energy to become effective.
they're only good in the stagnant position, when both sides are afraid to attack the other.
all in all: fuck off david kim.
Yea so not fair because a spire, hive and greater spire and building corruptors to broodlords are instant cast :/
ravens are only powerful if you can get to them. it's so easy to just straight out die when you're investing so much money into starports and the raven upgrades, and waiting for enough ravens, and for the ravens to accumulate enough energy to become effective.
they're only good in the stagnant position, when both sides are afraid to attack the other.
all in all: fuck off david kim.
Yea so not fair because a spire, hive and greater spire and building corruptors to broodlords are instant cast :/
relative to ravens, broodlord switches are extremely fast, and are actually useful the second you have them.
I'd ask for someone to do this again using recent data but it would be harder to whine about.
Cherry picking data is nice. Especially when you can use things like wcs France, china, usa and new Zealand which were always going to be won by a Zerg. At least this image is less biased than the original
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
It takes one action to use a seeker missile, and mech doesn't take APM fyi... Not sure if you remember the guy who literally chooses what to use every action on (GoOdy)
The thing is though, how do we get in range to use seeker missile if you spam fungal growth?
The same way infestors are able to use fungle growth even though seige tanks out range it?
By having broodlords to force the infestors to unsiege?
I haven't seen IEM, was on vacation, but recent TvZ play (MLG summer, recent GSL) seems to be centered mainly around destroying the zerg before the very lategame. I personally have no real problem with that if winrates are fairly balanced during that time, except that it makes for generic gameplay.
That's how PvZ is too... But I would take ravens over a mothership any day when fighting broodlord/infestor. One neural parasite and you lose a mothership, and lose the game, at least you have multiple chances with ravens, even if they have slightly lower range. I hate that the only toss answer is the mothership, that's why I can't wait for HotS Tempests.
I'd ask for someone to do this again using recent data but it would be harder to whine about.
Cherry picking data is nice. Especially when you can use things like wcs France, china, usa and new Zealand which were always going to be won by a Zerg. At least this image is less biased than the original
I agree. Also balance is decided by the top players, not players in masters league or below or even "middling" GM players. The fact Terrans have had a tough time winning tournaments in New Zealand is not meaningful.
the reasoning of the statement bugs me the most. i stopped playing anyway after the queen buff. its demotivating. and turns your fun into disgust. even watching sc2 becomes boring. probably WOL was the last blizzard rts game ever purchased
I'd ask for someone to do this again using recent data but it would be harder to whine about.
Cherry picking data is nice. Especially when you can use things like wcs France, china, usa and new Zealand which were always going to be won by a Zerg. At least this image is less biased than the original
I agree. Also balance is decided by the top players, not players in masters league or below or even "middling" GM players. The fact Terrans have had a tough time winning tournaments in New Zealand is not meaningful.
Balance = all races has equal chance at winning and the winner is the one who is more skilled, sometimes of course luck affects the outcome
So the fact that terrans in New Zealand are having rougher time than the other races is actually meaningful if we truly want balanced game.
this is stupid... mvp destroying some zergs on metropolis with sick multitasking and THEN sitting back with some ravens means nothing, nothing at all, i hope blizzard evaluate their own wcs, though they might not find anything in the TvX matchups, because of no terrans.
Why are people posting links to random foreigner tournament results after the queen buff? This means absolutely nothing.
They are balancing around the highest level of gameplay - that is GSL Code S (with some influence from Code A I'm sure...and soon to be the OSL/other Korean leagues). Not foreigners, or foreigner tournaments. There wasn't, and current isn't a significant drop in win rates for TvZ, or an under representation of Terran for extended period of time in GSL Code S.
Unless something drastically changes in HotS, you are never going to see balanced win rates for Terran foreigners. Terran is significantly harder to play both in terms of mechanics (physical) and strategy (mental) than the other 2 races. Terran is fine, but you need to be at the highest levels of skill. I personally think this isn't a problem, and I don't think they should be balancing the game around foreigners.
In the past there have been numerous buffs & nerfs from out of no where or based on a hand full of games. Now he's like oh wait hold on now these few guys are doing okay in a few matches so the game must be balanced. There is no consistency in how he's approached balance... somewhat concerning.
On September 01 2012 07:39 Netsky wrote: Why are people posting links to random foreigner tournament results after the queen buff? This means absolutely nothing.
They are balancing around the highest level of gameplay - that is GSL Code S (with some influence from Code A I'm sure...and soon to be the OSL/other Korean leagues). Not foreigners, or foreigner tournaments. There wasn't, and current isn't a significant drop in win rates for TvZ, or an under representation of Terran for extended period of time in GSL Code S.
Unless something drastically changes in HotS, you are never going to see balanced win rates for Terran foreigners. Terran is significantly harder to play both in terms of mechanics (physical) and strategy (mental) than the other 2 races. Terran is fine, but you need to be at the highest levels of skill. I personally think this is fine, and I don't think they should be balancing the game around foreigners.
"The most interesting tournament in this context was the IEM at gamescom 2012 in Cologne, Germany, where we saw players such as Kas and MVP make use of Ravens in ways that held a lot of potential."
They are not balancing around Code S only, and there are numerous examples of this (Thor nerf after Thorzain, etc.)
Mvp and TaeJa are good enough to make TvZ balanced, and the game SHOULD be balanced for the highest level. However, the underlying problem is a little deeper. While the game seems pretty darn balanced at the top level right now, Terran is still MUCH HARDER to actually play than both of the other two races. It seems that in HotS, they are trying to make Terran easier and this is the complete wrong decision. What they should be doing is making Protoss and Zerg HARDER than they are currently.
Sounds reasonable, but if this thread is any indication, Terrans will just interpret this as Kim telling them they need to whine louder. Moreover, it's Protoss, not Zerg, that has been quietly dominating in Korea that past few months. If there's any evidence of an imbalance at the highest level, it's that, not TvZ. There too, however, it would be premature to make any knee-jerk balance adjustments, so the wait-and-see approach is ideal in any event.
i think its more interesting to look at the extemes for high level tournements. When terran does well in a major tournement there is usually only 1 left by the semi finals. On the opposite of exteme look at wcs korea, where korea has always been terran heavy despite any nerf or patch, not a single terran placed in the top 10 to qualify in wcs asia.....
On September 01 2012 07:52 kochanfe wrote: Mvp and TaeJa are good enough to make TvZ balanced, and the game SHOULD be balanced for the highest level. However, the underlying problem is a little deeper. While the game seems pretty darn balanced at the top level right now, Terran is still MUCH HARDER to actually play than both of the other two races. It seems that in HotS, they are trying to make Terran easier and this is the complete wrong decision. What they should be doing is making Protoss and Zerg HARDER than they are currently.
So many nerfs Blizzard has done where they could of just wait and saw how the metagame shifted, but whenever it comes to Terran being too strong BOOM FUCKING NERF!
My guess would be all the terrans complaining right now are maybe diamond or above because honestly I'm a mid plat terran and have absolutely no problem with zerg, it's pretty balanced to me. So if you are complaining about tvz balance and you're plat or under you don't need a buff
On September 01 2012 07:52 kochanfe wrote: Mvp and TaeJa are good enough to make TvZ balanced, and the game SHOULD be balanced for the highest level. However, the underlying problem is a little deeper. While the game seems pretty darn balanced at the top level right now, Terran is still MUCH HARDER to actually play than both of the other two races. It seems that in HotS, they are trying to make Terran easier and this is the complete wrong decision. What they should be doing is making Protoss and Zerg HARDER than they are currently.
I don't mind so much that they are playing the wait and see game to see how metagame develops - the only issue I have with this is that they seem to be incredibly inconsistent with their approach in regards to this. Even if winrates are getting back close to 50/50 (which it was before patch anyways), TvZ used to be widely viewed as the most entertaining matchup to watch - which it was for me as well, but now I personally think its one of the most boring, and I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way.
This is what bothers me the most, why change something that was not only balanced but spectacular to watch as well? Considering there has been a lot of entertaining TvP lately, and TvZ used to be awesome, the only non-mirror match that truly needed fixing was the silly late game win or die by vortex in PvZ.
Yeah .. I think Blizzard called this one correctly. MVP is not an outlier and Terrans will all soon be able to handle the APM and multitasking required to grind Zerg to dust in a late game 30 minute match. Good call Browder!
I'd be able to stand this if they would let things be more often but why is it only Terran that they feel so hands off on? Where was this line of thinking before when matchups were balancing out? What happened to the Blizzard that changed fungal a billion times? That adjusted the bunker every other patch? That decided 6 range queens and faster overlords should be in the game after almost no testing when the matchup was close to 50-50?
For them to even say the matchup is starting to favor Terran is an insult to anyone's intelligence. Heck even the mention of Kas who beat some foreigner zergs who aren't experienced and a out of form Nestea is a farce.
haha they bring out a balance change in favor zerg out of nowhere and when terra struggels for months, all you hear is "give them time"......i heard this bullshit MONTHS ago....how much time is "give them a little bit more time", 2 years??
Can someone please answer me this. Does anyone on the Blizzard design team actually play SC2 or are they just spectators, as I am?
Since SC2s release I've seen Terran nerfed every single time they find a viable strat against Z or P and it's rather sad actually.But worse than sad is that Blizzard bases its balance on less than a handful of "pro" Terrans. That indicates to me that they could care less about anyone else, even though most of you are not Pros, but just in the game for fun and kids who shelled out 60 bucks to line the pockets of Blizzard employees.
Ravens good unit? Hell yeah, if you have the right map and can get to late game. But I warn you Terrans, if you start winning too much with Ravens, mark my word, there will be a Raven nerf in the near future.
On September 01 2012 08:06 Zealot Lord wrote: I don't mind so much that they are playing the wait and see game to see how metagame develops - the only issue I have with this is that they seem to be incredibly inconsistent with their approach in regards to this. Even if winrates are getting back close to 50/50 (which it was before patch anyways), TvZ used to be widely viewed as the most entertaining matchup to watch - which it was for me as well, but now I personally think its one of the most boring, and I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way.
This is what bothers me the most, why change something that was not only balanced but spectacular to watch as well? Considering there has been a lot of entertaining TvP lately, and TvZ used to be awesome, the only non-mirror match that truly needed fixing was the silly late game win or die by vortex in PvZ.
Read. According to their data, it's not a regular situation in the sense that proposed balance changes may be countered by shifting metagame more than they anticipated. That has not happened before. So consistency has nothing to do with it.
On September 01 2012 07:52 kochanfe wrote: Mvp and TaeJa are good enough to make TvZ balanced, and the game SHOULD be balanced for the highest level. However, the underlying problem is a little deeper. While the game seems pretty darn balanced at the top level right now, Terran is still MUCH HARDER to actually play than both of the other two races. It seems that in HotS, they are trying to make Terran easier and this is the complete wrong decision. What they should be doing is making Protoss and Zerg HARDER than they are currently.
I agree with this guy. MVP and Taeja aren't invincible by any means, neither are they extremely abusive players. They just understand the match up better than other Terrans. People needs to stop considering that they deserve wins when they don't comprehend the skills involved. Stop considering all the pros always should be on the same level when their understanding clearly aren't. After all, why not play like Taeja and MVP, if you can't, then you're not at the level you need to be. Blizzard's balance team is a group of professionals who works full time hauling data trying to make everything good. We shouldn't disrespect or belittle their opinions.
On September 01 2012 07:52 kochanfe wrote: Mvp and TaeJa are good enough to make TvZ balanced, and the game SHOULD be balanced for the highest level. However, the underlying problem is a little deeper. While the game seems pretty darn balanced at the top level right now, Terran is still MUCH HARDER to actually play than both of the other two races. It seems that in HotS, they are trying to make Terran easier and this is the complete wrong decision. What they should be doing is making Protoss and Zerg HARDER than they are currently.
lol
Laugh all you want but he is SO right
Based on what statistical, able-to-be-proved evidence? A players personal anecdotes do not count btw.
On September 01 2012 08:06 Spinoza wrote: Yeah .. I think Blizzard called this one correctly. MVP is not an outlier and Terrans will all soon be able to handle the APM and multitasking required to grind Zerg to dust in a late game 30 minute match. Good call Browder!
I think the biggest beef most terran players have is not that the matchup is broken balance wise but that as you say you need amazing APM and multitasking to even stay even, at the same time you are subjected to some of the most volatile situations in any matchup. There are so many blink of an eye things that can instantly lose you the game as terran even if you were winning before. You just need to get your vikings fungaled ONCE in a bad position to instantly lose a won game. Yes it is right to say that you should not have gotten into the situation to get them fungaled in the first place but the point is there is no where near as many volatile situations for zerg. People are frustrated that they should need to have 100 more apm than the opponent to play the game evenly.
On September 01 2012 07:45 Aetherial wrote: I call Shenanigans on David Kim.
In the past there have been numerous buffs & nerfs from out of no where or based on a hand full of games. Now he's like oh wait hold on now these few guys are doing okay in a few matches so the game must be balanced. There is no consistency in how he's approached balance... somewhat concerning.
He is right though, they really shouldn't be nerfing stuff that they know isn't OP. People seem to forget that he was involved with MAKING this game. All the strategies we're using were designed by him, he knows 100 percent what is or isn't broken.
even if they nerf race X that thard that all players of race X drop down to bronze league, after a while the winrates of all MU would still be close to even since the match making system would give race X just opponents that they are likely to kill 50 % of the time....how can david kim even talk about winrates?
On September 01 2012 07:45 Aetherial wrote: I call Shenanigans on David Kim.
In the past there have been numerous buffs & nerfs from out of no where or based on a hand full of games. Now he's like oh wait hold on now these few guys are doing okay in a few matches so the game must be balanced. There is no consistency in how he's approached balance... somewhat concerning.
He is right though, they really shouldn't be nerfing stuff that they know isn't OP. People seem to forget that he was involved with MAKING this game. All the strategies we're using were designed by him, he knows 100 percent what is or isn't broken.
To say that because David Kim HELPED make a game, he knows 100 percent what is or isn't broken is just completely flawed logic. That's like saying Blizzard knows what's broken with Diablo 3 cause they made it, which we all (at least the people who have played Diablo 3 ) know isn't the truth.
On September 01 2012 07:45 Aetherial wrote: I call Shenanigans on David Kim.
In the past there have been numerous buffs & nerfs from out of no where or based on a hand full of games. Now he's like oh wait hold on now these few guys are doing okay in a few matches so the game must be balanced. There is no consistency in how he's approached balance... somewhat concerning.
He is right though, they really shouldn't be nerfing stuff that they know isn't OP. People seem to forget that he was involved with MAKING this game. All the strategies we're using were designed by him, he knows 100 percent what is or isn't broken.
None of the strategies we use were designed by him. He is not an all seeing god who foresaw how we would play the game. The blizzard balance team determines the math of the game but it is players who design strategies.
On September 01 2012 07:45 Aetherial wrote: I call Shenanigans on David Kim.
In the past there have been numerous buffs & nerfs from out of no where or based on a hand full of games. Now he's like oh wait hold on now these few guys are doing okay in a few matches so the game must be balanced. There is no consistency in how he's approached balance... somewhat concerning.
He is right though, they really shouldn't be nerfing stuff that they know isn't OP. People seem to forget that he was involved with MAKING this game. All the strategies we're using were designed by him, he knows 100 percent what is or isn't broken.
There is a quote somewhere that blizzard put all the mechanics and numbers in there, and let players figure out what to do. Like for example I don't think Blizzard envisioned forge fast expands vs zerg.
On September 01 2012 08:06 Zealot Lord wrote: I don't mind so much that they are playing the wait and see game to see how metagame develops - the only issue I have with this is that they seem to be incredibly inconsistent with their approach in regards to this. Even if winrates are getting back close to 50/50 (which it was before patch anyways), TvZ used to be widely viewed as the most entertaining matchup to watch - which it was for me as well, but now I personally think its one of the most boring, and I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way.
This is what bothers me the most, why change something that was not only balanced but spectacular to watch as well? Considering there has been a lot of entertaining TvP lately, and TvZ used to be awesome, the only non-mirror match that truly needed fixing was the silly late game win or die by vortex in PvZ.
Read. According to their data, it's not a regular situation in the sense that proposed balance changes may be countered by shifting metagame more than they anticipated. That has not happened before. So consistency has nothing to do with it.
No they have been inconsistent. They have been considerably slower in implementing balance changes as the game has progressed, and have been making smaller changes as well. The meta game is always shifting, so that isn't a real argument.
It's probably a good thing, though. Some of the big, knee-jerk changes from te past is why the game is so bad right now (i.e. the infestor buff)
On September 01 2012 07:45 Aetherial wrote: I call Shenanigans on David Kim.
In the past there have been numerous buffs & nerfs from out of no where or based on a hand full of games. Now he's like oh wait hold on now these few guys are doing okay in a few matches so the game must be balanced. There is no consistency in how he's approached balance... somewhat concerning.
He is right though, they really shouldn't be nerfing stuff that they know isn't OP. People seem to forget that he was involved with MAKING this game. All the strategies we're using were designed by him, he knows 100 percent what is or isn't broken.
There is no way D.K. knows 100% of what is or isn't broken. And he definately did not design all the strategies we are using.
Granted, he knows a whole lot more than any one posting in this thread, but your statement is 100% false.
Why not make Colossus and Broodlords into real siege units the way Siege tanks are. I.E. make them have the same damage they do now, but make them immobile while dealing damage: this would IMHO make the game more interesting and more like siege tank chess from BW.
This way they could keep the raven as it currently is in addition to making the game more entertaining.
So you buff other races when they complain (or nerf Terran) but now when we complain you sit back and do nothing?
What the actual fuck? Like seriously be consistent for once Blizzard. Either be hands off or hands on, don't pick and choose races to be hands off or hands on with.
You either sit back for all of the races, or you are involved with all the races.
On September 01 2012 08:06 Zealot Lord wrote: I don't mind so much that they are playing the wait and see game to see how metagame develops - the only issue I have with this is that they seem to be incredibly inconsistent with their approach in regards to this. Even if winrates are getting back close to 50/50 (which it was before patch anyways), TvZ used to be widely viewed as the most entertaining matchup to watch - which it was for me as well, but now I personally think its one of the most boring, and I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way.
This is what bothers me the most, why change something that was not only balanced but spectacular to watch as well? Considering there has been a lot of entertaining TvP lately, and TvZ used to be awesome, the only non-mirror match that truly needed fixing was the silly late game win or die by vortex in PvZ.
Read. According to their data, it's not a regular situation in the sense that proposed balance changes may be countered by shifting metagame more than they anticipated. That has not happened before. So consistency has nothing to do with it.
You're missing the point big time. The inconsistency is that Blizzard waited at all and watched for shifts in the meta. A number of Terran nerfs have occurred almost instantly after a single tournament or even a handful of games. Where was Blizzard's wait and see attitude then? Why is Blizzard content to let Terran get murdered in TvZ for months but not okay with giving Zergs time to figure out how to better defend against blue flame or work out new compositions in response to ghost-based lategame? The nerf hammer only seems to work one way in SC2, and it's getting really old. Especially at a time when every Terran from Mvp all the way down to Joe Diamond League feels like they have to thoroughly outplay Zergs just to have a shot at winning a game.
On September 01 2012 07:45 Aetherial wrote: I call Shenanigans on David Kim.
In the past there have been numerous buffs & nerfs from out of no where or based on a hand full of games. Now he's like oh wait hold on now these few guys are doing okay in a few matches so the game must be balanced. There is no consistency in how he's approached balance... somewhat concerning.
He is right though, they really shouldn't be nerfing stuff that they know isn't OP. People seem to forget that he was involved with MAKING this game. All the strategies we're using were designed by him, he knows 100 percent what is or isn't broken.
There is a quote somewhere that blizzard put all the mechanics and numbers in there, and let players figure out what to do. Like for example I don't think Blizzard envisioned forge fast expands vs zerg.
Though you are generally right (I think), FFE is a Broodwar concept and was one of the first things that got experimented with. People just scrapped it due to terrible maps, overpowered roaches and bad Forcefielding skills (vs banelings) and only restarted FFE once Zergs figuered out sentry expands.
I think that Terrans should try to use Ghosts again. There was a reason to Zergs refuse to use infestors before. It's was because ghosts come into play more often to counter all Zerg Tier 3 and, in the end, Infestors too. Wtih Ghosts fading out, Zerg aren't afraid to make hundreds of infestors because there isn't anything in the actual metagame that can handle them.
With ghosts dealing with infestors Marines can attack BLs freely. Vikings will be way more effective without fungals. And, Ghosts demand the same infrastrcuture as Marauders (techlabed raxes), so Terran can deal with tech switches more easily (you don't have to throw 3 or 4 starports to get ravens or mass vikings).
On September 01 2012 07:45 Aetherial wrote: I call Shenanigans on David Kim.
In the past there have been numerous buffs & nerfs from out of no where or based on a hand full of games. Now he's like oh wait hold on now these few guys are doing okay in a few matches so the game must be balanced. There is no consistency in how he's approached balance... somewhat concerning.
He is right though, they really shouldn't be nerfing stuff that they know isn't OP. People seem to forget that he was involved with MAKING this game. All the strategies we're using were designed by him, he knows 100 percent what is or isn't broken.
There is a quote somewhere that blizzard put all the mechanics and numbers in there, and let players figure out what to do. Like for example I don't think Blizzard envisioned forge fast expands vs zerg.
Though you are generally right (I think), FFE is a Broodwar concept and was one of the first things that got experimented with. People just scrapped it due to terrible maps, overpowered roaches and bad Forcefielding skills (vs banelings) and only restarted FFE once Zergs figuered out sentry expands.
Its funny how the meta has basically changed to mimic BW's meta. FFE has been around since the days of Nal_rA and has been seen for the better part of a decade before SCII was a twinkle in Blizzard's Development Teams' eyes. All the variations including gate expands and 2 gates as well as 1 rax FE are exact copies of the feel that BW builds had attained.
What we should look for now is eventually seeing the builds evolve beyond what we have today. If you were to mention 3 base opening ZvP on BW forums, it might be a different build but the people would know what you're talking about. If you mentioned 1 rax FE or FFE on the BW forums, the same would apply.
On September 01 2012 08:06 Zealot Lord wrote: I don't mind so much that they are playing the wait and see game to see how metagame develops - the only issue I have with this is that they seem to be incredibly inconsistent with their approach in regards to this. Even if winrates are getting back close to 50/50 (which it was before patch anyways), TvZ used to be widely viewed as the most entertaining matchup to watch - which it was for me as well, but now I personally think its one of the most boring, and I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way.
This is what bothers me the most, why change something that was not only balanced but spectacular to watch as well? Considering there has been a lot of entertaining TvP lately, and TvZ used to be awesome, the only non-mirror match that truly needed fixing was the silly late game win or die by vortex in PvZ.
Read. According to their data, it's not a regular situation in the sense that proposed balance changes may be countered by shifting metagame more than they anticipated. That has not happened before. So consistency has nothing to do with it.
No they have been inconsistent. They have been considerably slower in implementing balance changes as the game has progressed, and have been making smaller changes as well. The meta game is always shifting, so that isn't a real argument.
It's probably a good thing, though. Some of the big, knee-jerk changes from te past is why the game is so bad right now (i.e. the infestor buff)
bolded part Again, read. I said the proposed balance changes were countered by shifting metagame more than blizzard anticipated, as said in the article. So the metagame shifting in itself wasn't the reason of withdrawal of balance change proposal, so the that the metagame constantly shifts is not an argument against a change in policy.
Before bolded part. Well, you're suggesting a balancing strategy (with which i can agree), and they've been consistent with that strategy. I don't see the inconsistency with that? Consistency does not mean always doing the same. Also, as I said and is mentioned in the article, the shift of metagame was so big relative the the anticipated impact of the proposed balance change, that this case could not be compared to other balance changes. That's why i said consistency is irrelevant, it's a whole new situation.
On September 01 2012 08:06 Zealot Lord wrote: I don't mind so much that they are playing the wait and see game to see how metagame develops - the only issue I have with this is that they seem to be incredibly inconsistent with their approach in regards to this. Even if winrates are getting back close to 50/50 (which it was before patch anyways), TvZ used to be widely viewed as the most entertaining matchup to watch - which it was for me as well, but now I personally think its one of the most boring, and I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way.
This is what bothers me the most, why change something that was not only balanced but spectacular to watch as well? Considering there has been a lot of entertaining TvP lately, and TvZ used to be awesome, the only non-mirror match that truly needed fixing was the silly late game win or die by vortex in PvZ.
Read. According to their data, it's not a regular situation in the sense that proposed balance changes may be countered by shifting metagame more than they anticipated. That has not happened before. So consistency has nothing to do with it.
I read it - what I don't agree with is that they are being inconsistent with their balancing approach. Theres been a ton of 'fixes' which never gave chance for metagame to develop/shift, they usually suggest it and implement the changes within weeks. The only difference this time is that there happened to be a tournament (IEM) that happened to have a lot of late game TvZ at the same time as the proposed balanced adjustments.
But the main point is, how many people were complaining about TvZ matchup before patch? The one who plays better that game wins a large percentage of the time, which is what you want out of balance. They said themselves the win rates looked to be even, yet they implement changes to do what? Just to change the metagame for the sake of it? I'm a protoss player, so I don't have an allegiance to terran, but as a spectator, all I can is that TvZ is a snoozefest to watch nowadays (although to be fair some of the blame should go to the maps as well, like Atlantis spaceship etc.) =/
On September 01 2012 08:06 Zealot Lord wrote: I don't mind so much that they are playing the wait and see game to see how metagame develops - the only issue I have with this is that they seem to be incredibly inconsistent with their approach in regards to this. Even if winrates are getting back close to 50/50 (which it was before patch anyways), TvZ used to be widely viewed as the most entertaining matchup to watch - which it was for me as well, but now I personally think its one of the most boring, and I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way.
This is what bothers me the most, why change something that was not only balanced but spectacular to watch as well? Considering there has been a lot of entertaining TvP lately, and TvZ used to be awesome, the only non-mirror match that truly needed fixing was the silly late game win or die by vortex in PvZ.
Read. According to their data, it's not a regular situation in the sense that proposed balance changes may be countered by shifting metagame more than they anticipated. That has not happened before. So consistency has nothing to do with it.
I read it - what I don't agree with is that they are being inconsistent with their balancing approach. Theres been a ton of 'fixes' which never gave chance for metagame to develop/shift, they usually suggest it and implement the changes within weeks. The only difference this time is that there happened to be a tournament (IEM) that happened to have a lot of late game TvZ at the same time as the proposed balanced adjustments.
But the main point is, how many people were complaining about TvZ matchup before patch? The one who plays better that game wins a large percentage of the time, which is what you want out of balance. They said themselves the win rates looked to be even, yet they implement changes to do what? Just to change the metagame for the sake of it? I'm a protoss player, so I don't have an allegiance to terran, but as a spectator, all I can is that TvZ is a snoozefest to watch nowadays (although to be fair some of the blame should go to the maps as well, like Atlantis spaceship etc.) =/
like they changed ghosts like a week or less after the mvp vs nestea game that nestea threw
On September 01 2012 08:06 Zealot Lord wrote: I don't mind so much that they are playing the wait and see game to see how metagame develops - the only issue I have with this is that they seem to be incredibly inconsistent with their approach in regards to this. Even if winrates are getting back close to 50/50 (which it was before patch anyways), TvZ used to be widely viewed as the most entertaining matchup to watch - which it was for me as well, but now I personally think its one of the most boring, and I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way.
This is what bothers me the most, why change something that was not only balanced but spectacular to watch as well? Considering there has been a lot of entertaining TvP lately, and TvZ used to be awesome, the only non-mirror match that truly needed fixing was the silly late game win or die by vortex in PvZ.
Read. According to their data, it's not a regular situation in the sense that proposed balance changes may be countered by shifting metagame more than they anticipated. That has not happened before. So consistency has nothing to do with it.
I read it - but I don't agree they are being consistent with it. Theres been a ton of 'fixes' which never gave chance for metagame to develop/shift, they usually suggest it and implement the changes within weeks. The only difference this time is that there happened to be a tournament (IEM) that happened to have a lot of late game TvZ at the same time as the proposed balanced adjustments.
But the main point is, how many people were complaining about TvZ matchup before patch? The one who plays better that game wins a large percentage of the time, which is what you want out of balance. They said themselves the win rates looked to be even, yet they implement changes to do what? Just to change the metagame for the sake of it? I'm a protoss player, so I don't have an allegiance to terran, but as a spectator, all I can is that TvZ is a snoozefest to watch nowadays (although to be fair some of the blame should go to the maps as well, like Atlantis spaceship etc.) =/
They always said that they are going to balance things if they think they are too strong, even if the winrates do not indicate that. That's why they did the queen/OL patch (too strong Terran allins early on), that's why they did the tank patch (tanks too good in all situations), that's why they did the roach patch (mass roach too hard to deal with) etc. They are very consistent with this, though I have to admit that following this logic they should have further nerfed the infestor and the marine a long time ago.
I have seen a lot of improvment compared to the last few months. I found some nice builds that work for me and I'm ok with TvZ right now.
My only complaint is how greedy zergs can be and get away with it with little to no risk of losing right then and there. Zergs can go so long without having to make any units besides a queen. They should be able to be punished, and forced to make units. Queens and infestors are too much of all around units. How they would fix that is beyond me, but something needs to be done to where we can force units and harrass again.
On September 01 2012 08:06 Zealot Lord wrote: I don't mind so much that they are playing the wait and see game to see how metagame develops - the only issue I have with this is that they seem to be incredibly inconsistent with their approach in regards to this. Even if winrates are getting back close to 50/50 (which it was before patch anyways), TvZ used to be widely viewed as the most entertaining matchup to watch - which it was for me as well, but now I personally think its one of the most boring, and I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way.
This is what bothers me the most, why change something that was not only balanced but spectacular to watch as well? Considering there has been a lot of entertaining TvP lately, and TvZ used to be awesome, the only non-mirror match that truly needed fixing was the silly late game win or die by vortex in PvZ.
Read. According to their data, it's not a regular situation in the sense that proposed balance changes may be countered by shifting metagame more than they anticipated. That has not happened before. So consistency has nothing to do with it.
You're missing the point big time.The inconsistency is that Blizzard waited at all and watched for shifts in the meta. A number of Terran nerfs have occurred almost instantly after a single tournament or even a handful of games. Where was Blizzard's wait and see attitude then? Why is Blizzard content to let Terran get murdered in TvZ for months but not okay with giving Zergs time to figure out how to better defend against blue flame or work out new compositions in response to ghost-based lategame? The nerf hammer only seems to work one way in SC2, and it's getting really old. Especially at a time when every Terran from Mvp all the way down to Joe Diamond League feels like they have to thoroughly outplay Zergs just to have a shot at winning a game.
And i can say you are missing the point big time. Post hoc ergo propter hoc as well as not seeing the difference between a somewhat (temporarily) balanced game with undesirable strategies and a somewhat (temporarily) imbalanced game with desirable strategies. The first example needs to be removed, the second can even out (and that's what happening atm, imo).
most of the things i see blizzard do, make sense for me. (biggest exception is fungal in general)
On September 01 2012 08:06 Zealot Lord wrote: I don't mind so much that they are playing the wait and see game to see how metagame develops - the only issue I have with this is that they seem to be incredibly inconsistent with their approach in regards to this. Even if winrates are getting back close to 50/50 (which it was before patch anyways), TvZ used to be widely viewed as the most entertaining matchup to watch - which it was for me as well, but now I personally think its one of the most boring, and I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way.
This is what bothers me the most, why change something that was not only balanced but spectacular to watch as well? Considering there has been a lot of entertaining TvP lately, and TvZ used to be awesome, the only non-mirror match that truly needed fixing was the silly late game win or die by vortex in PvZ.
Read. According to their data, it's not a regular situation in the sense that proposed balance changes may be countered by shifting metagame more than they anticipated. That has not happened before. So consistency has nothing to do with it.
I read it - what I don't agree with is that they are being inconsistent with their balancing approach. Theres been a ton of 'fixes' which never gave chance for metagame to develop/shift, they usually suggest it and implement the changes within weeks. The only difference this time is that there happened to be a tournament (IEM) that happened to have a lot of late game TvZ at the same time as the proposed balanced adjustments.
But the main point is, how many people were complaining about TvZ matchup before patch? The one who plays better that game wins a large percentage of the time, which is what you want out of balance. They said themselves the win rates looked to be even, yet they implement changes to do what? Just to change the metagame for the sake of it? I'm a protoss player, so I don't have an allegiance to terran, but as a spectator, all I can is that TvZ is a snoozefest to watch nowadays (although to be fair some of the blame should go to the maps as well, like Atlantis spaceship etc.) =/
like they changed ghosts like a week or less after the mvp vs nestea game that nestea threw
Super heavy ghosts armies had been popular for about a month or two before that.
On September 01 2012 08:06 Spinoza wrote: Yeah .. I think Blizzard called this one correctly. MVP is not an outlier and Terrans will all soon be able to handle the APM and multitasking required to grind Zerg to dust in a late game 30 minute match. Good call Browder!
I think the biggest beef most terran players have is not that the matchup is broken balance wise but that as you say you need amazing APM and multitasking to even stay even, at the same time you are subjected to some of the most volatile situations in any matchup. There are so many blink of an eye things that can instantly lose you the game as terran even if you were winning before. You just need to get your vikings fungaled ONCE in a bad position to instantly lose a won game. Yes it is right to say that you should not have gotten into the situation to get them fungaled in the first place but the point is there is no where near as many volatile situations for zerg. People are frustrated that they should need to have 100 more apm than the opponent to play the game evenly.
Please upload your 10 most recent TvZ replays, i would like to see your 180-200 EPM, or 200-300 apm average ^^ I play mostly against high diamond and master T players and very few of them have more than 160 apm, and usually around 90-110 EPM. most of them, except high masters, just queue up drops and never look at them again (resulting in losing all the units + medivacs for no real reason, especially vs spores and spines)
The problem with these TvZ discussions these days is that people just seem to assume that terrans are better at multitasking and got higher apm and are always outplaying zerg players that 1-A and drool.. and i'm yet to see anything that points towards that being true.
Fun fact: most terrans in Diamond/mid master have their whole army on 1-2 hotkeys too, and move their armies in giant deathballs ^^
Terrans in diamond arent high master players being held back by nerfs, they are diamond terrans with around the same apm as their zerg opponents, do they get punished when making big mistakes like moving 50 marines in a giant clump and getting then fungaled? yeah, same happens with zergs that 1-a banelings into thors, infestors walking into siege range, and not defending vs drops properly.
The balance whine in this thread is a disgrace. David Kim and his team have done a great job balancing the game, we should not question their decisions when to patch what.
Also the arguments about Taeja and MVP just being the best players are plain stupid and already known from zerg back when Nestea "just was the best player".
Grow up and focus on getting better at the game instead of this useless discussion please.
On September 01 2012 08:06 Zealot Lord wrote: I don't mind so much that they are playing the wait and see game to see how metagame develops - the only issue I have with this is that they seem to be incredibly inconsistent with their approach in regards to this. Even if winrates are getting back close to 50/50 (which it was before patch anyways), TvZ used to be widely viewed as the most entertaining matchup to watch - which it was for me as well, but now I personally think its one of the most boring, and I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way.
This is what bothers me the most, why change something that was not only balanced but spectacular to watch as well? Considering there has been a lot of entertaining TvP lately, and TvZ used to be awesome, the only non-mirror match that truly needed fixing was the silly late game win or die by vortex in PvZ.
Read. According to their data, it's not a regular situation in the sense that proposed balance changes may be countered by shifting metagame more than they anticipated. That has not happened before. So consistency has nothing to do with it.
I read it - but I don't agree they are being consistent with it. Theres been a ton of 'fixes' which never gave chance for metagame to develop/shift, they usually suggest it and implement the changes within weeks. The only difference this time is that there happened to be a tournament (IEM) that happened to have a lot of late game TvZ at the same time as the proposed balanced adjustments.
But the main point is, how many people were complaining about TvZ matchup before patch? The one who plays better that game wins a large percentage of the time, which is what you want out of balance. They said themselves the win rates looked to be even, yet they implement changes to do what? Just to change the metagame for the sake of it? I'm a protoss player, so I don't have an allegiance to terran, but as a spectator, all I can is that TvZ is a snoozefest to watch nowadays (although to be fair some of the blame should go to the maps as well, like Atlantis spaceship etc.) =/
They always said that they are going to balance things if they think they are too strong, even if the winrates do not indicate that. That's why they did the queen/OL patch (too strong Terran allins early on), that's why they did the tank patch (tanks too good in all situations), that's why they did the roach patch (mass roach too hard to deal with) etc. They are very consistent with this, though I have to admit that following this logic they should have further nerfed the infestor and the marine a long time ago.
On September 01 2012 08:06 Zealot Lord wrote: I don't mind so much that they are playing the wait and see game to see how metagame develops - the only issue I have with this is that they seem to be incredibly inconsistent with their approach in regards to this. Even if winrates are getting back close to 50/50 (which it was before patch anyways), TvZ used to be widely viewed as the most entertaining matchup to watch - which it was for me as well, but now I personally think its one of the most boring, and I'm sure I'm not the only one that feels this way.
This is what bothers me the most, why change something that was not only balanced but spectacular to watch as well? Considering there has been a lot of entertaining TvP lately, and TvZ used to be awesome, the only non-mirror match that truly needed fixing was the silly late game win or die by vortex in PvZ.
Read. According to their data, it's not a regular situation in the sense that proposed balance changes may be countered by shifting metagame more than they anticipated. That has not happened before. So consistency has nothing to do with it.
You're missing the point big time.The inconsistency is that Blizzard waited at all and watched for shifts in the meta. A number of Terran nerfs have occurred almost instantly after a single tournament or even a handful of games. Where was Blizzard's wait and see attitude then? Why is Blizzard content to let Terran get murdered in TvZ for months but not okay with giving Zergs time to figure out how to better defend against blue flame or work out new compositions in response to ghost-based lategame? The nerf hammer only seems to work one way in SC2, and it's getting really old. Especially at a time when every Terran from Mvp all the way down to Joe Diamond League feels like they have to thoroughly outplay Zergs just to have a shot at winning a game.
And i can say you are missing the point big time. Post hoc ergo propter hoc as well as not seeing the difference between a somewhat (temporarily) balanced game with undesirable strategies and a somewhat (temporarily) imbalanced game with desirable strategies. The first example needs to be removed, the second can even out (and that's what happening atm, imo).
most of the things i see blizzard do, make sense for me. (biggest exception is fungal in general)
On what planet is anything about the way TvZ plays out now desirable? If anything, what we have now is a mix of the two scenarios you put forth. It's a (maybe temporarily) imbalanced game with undesirable strategies (utterly stagnant nr20 races to a-move hive tech armies with fungal support vs feast or famine raven play - similar to the vortex situation in PvZ). Prior to the patch, we had a matchup where the win rates were starting to look pretty consistently good and the matchup itself was much loved by the community. Blizzard then decided to impose a new balance change aimed at helping lower league players who were bad at defending, and the effect on high level and pro play was and continues to be disastrous. Even if the numbers stabilize, what we have now is very much undesirable.
On September 01 2012 09:03 ZAiNs wrote: I'm disappointed he didn't say anything about the stale state of PvZ .
I suspect its because there needs to be too large scale of a change to fix the lategame issues - and thus it likely will be addressed through HOTS.
Yup this. PvZ isn't broken, just incredibly boring. There is no way that I can see that changing in WoL, hopefully hots can but we shall have to wait and see for that one.
On September 01 2012 09:20 Pulimuli wrote: So... Zerg has problems vs Terran = nerf the shit outa Terran while buffing Zerg and bring more macro oriented maps.
Terran has problems vs Zerg = lets let the game evolve
On September 01 2012 09:03 ZAiNs wrote: I'm disappointed he didn't say anything about the stale state of PvZ .
I suspect its because there needs to be too large scale of a change to fix the lategame issues - and thus it likely will be addressed through HOTS.
Yup this. PvZ isn't broken, just incredibly boring. There is no way that I can see that changing in WoL, hopefully hots can but we shall have to wait and see for that one.
Yeah.. I'm pretty sure the tempest range 22 thing is for this purpose personally, so you won't have the zerg slowly advancing through a wall of spines along with their infestor/broodlord.
I would totally support a slow-and-careful approach to balance if their very last patch hadn't made enormous, sweeping, totally unwarranted changes to a matchup.
For all those of you who point the finger so easily. First i would like to say if your low in league, and your apm is lacking... the zergs you play prob dont spread creep fast enough to matter and if they do focus upon that they are using their equally low apm on that and missing injects/other places such as upgrades in their game. If your seriously going to critisize using pro level play as a good standard for making changes to a game which is being used to a more Full potential in pro play than ladder, then where would you have it rather?
Would you rather it be balanced at a level of play that isn't using the current units/unit abilitys to their full potential? I mean seriously people i would love a few things changed as well but they just dont make sense.
He truly is clueless. Mvp and Bomber beat some fucking foreigners at IEM and it proves TvZ is balanced? What a joke.
On September 01 2012 09:03 ZAiNs wrote: I'm disappointed he didn't say anything about the stale state of PvZ .
I suspect its because there needs to be too large scale of a change to fix the lategame issues - and thus it likely will be addressed through HOTS.
Something like making Brood Lords 6 supply instead of 4 (which is kind of ridiculous) is worth considering still.
BLs are 4 supply? Wow! They are godly units and should be changed to 6 soon. I can't even imagine how to beat spread out BLs in PvZ late game. Even the pros can typically only do it with a Mothership Vortex and when the BLs/Infestors/Corruptors are all clumped up.
On September 01 2012 09:03 ZAiNs wrote: I'm disappointed he didn't say anything about the stale state of PvZ .
I suspect its because there needs to be too large scale of a change to fix the lategame issues - and thus it likely will be addressed through HOTS.
Something like making Brood Lords 6 supply instead of 4 (which is kind of ridiculous) is worth considering still.
BLs are 4 supply? Wow! They are godly units and should be changed to 6 soon. I can't even imagine how to beat spread out BLs in PvZ late game. Even the pros can typically only do it with a Mothership Vortex and when the BLs/Infestors/Corruptors are all clumped up.
I'm dumb nevermind, because I think after you use up the corruptor it only costs a total of 4 supply
On September 01 2012 09:48 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On September 01 2012 09:11 ZAiNs wrote:
On September 01 2012 09:08 Zealot Lord wrote:
On September 01 2012 09:03 ZAiNs wrote: I'm disappointed he didn't say anything about the stale state of PvZ .
I suspect its because there needs to be too large scale of a change to fix the lategame issues - and thus it likely will be addressed through HOTS.
Something like making Brood Lords 6 supply instead of 4 (which is kind of ridiculous) is worth considering still.
BLs are 4 supply? Wow! They are godly units and should be changed to 6 soon. I can't even imagine how to beat spread out BLs in PvZ late game. Even the pros can typically only do it with a Mothership Vortex and when the BLs/Infestors/Corruptors are all clumped up.
they ARE 6 supply...2 for the corruptor, 4 for the BL morph
On September 01 2012 09:04 soiii wrote: The balance whine in this thread is a disgrace. David Kim and his team have done a great job balancing the game, we should not question their decisions when to patch what.
Also the arguments about Taeja and MVP just being the best players are plain stupid and already known from zerg back when Nestea "just was the best player".
Grow up and focus on getting better at the game instead of this useless discussion please.
On September 01 2012 09:39 Belisarius wrote: I would totally support a slow-and-careful approach to balance if their very last patch hadn't made enormous, sweeping, totally unwarranted changes to a matchup.
Double standards, bro.
So you'd support it, but because of the queen patch you'll never support it again? Let the random patches commence.
I'd just like to chime in again and remind you all to really realize that it literally doesn't matter what change Kim proposed or dismissed, there would still be the exact same number of people in here saying he's an idiot and incompetent.
On September 01 2012 10:04 Jerubaal wrote: I'd just like to chime in again and remind you all to really realize that it literally doesn't matter what change Kim proposed or dismissed, there would still be the exact same number of people in here saying he's an idiot and incompetent.
Wrong; I liked David Kim before this, now I think he's just being an idiot. (spoiler: balance discussion) + Show Spoiler +
Before the queen buff TvZ was BY FAR the best match up to watch, the problem the queen change gave is that Terran is always behind in macro, and to compensate, damage to the mineral line was vital to be able to keep up with Zerg. The queen buff not only made it impossible for hellions/marines to kite queens early-game (where the damage done actually matters), but it allowed the Zerg players to be RIDICULOUSLY greedy...
Seriously, a unit that helps with macro (larva), helps with map control (creep spread), is superior to all early game air and ground unit choices the opponent can make, and it doesn't even use up a production slot.
It also takes away a lot of the decision making that made great Zergs stand out; when to build lings, when to drone. If you don't need lings to defend because you have queens, you can dedicate 100% of your larva to drone production, leaving yourself only mildly open to an all-in.
Terran players in the world cheer for fellow pro Terrans like Mvp or Teaja -> These pros manage to win TvZ despite the fact that many Terrans think Z is OP -> Terran players in the world are happy to see that their best of the best wins what they consider difficult match-up -> David Kim sees the matches/winrates including these games-> TvZ is fine, or so he thinks -> No buff for Terran -> Majority of Terrans who don't have Mvp or Teaja level of skill is screwed on ladder-> Terrans: "but we shouldn't blame our best of the best for doing fine even if that's the reason why there is no buff for us..."-> History repeats itself ->
Have we come to the point where Terran players cheer for Zerg when watching TvZ? Or, it doesn't happen for a good reason? Come to think of it, what a dilemma people have...
Majority of Terrans who don't have Mvp or Teaja level of skill is screwed on ladder->
To be fair, I'd say anyone under high masters won't even notice a patch change. If you're mid-masters or lower, you lose due to mistakes YOU do(Be it mismicro, macro, etc), and the other person being better.
A minor change to the game won't make or break lower leagues like it will the top .1%
When zergs whinge David Kim comes riding in on a white horse making unnecessary changes, good to see they aren't going to make the same mistakes again and screw the game up with their over zealous "balancing"
Majority of Terrans who don't have Mvp or Teaja level of skill is screwed on ladder->
To be fair, I'd say anyone under high masters won't even notice a patch change. If you're mid-masters or lower, you lose due to mistakes YOU do(Be it mismicro, macro, etc), and the other person being better.
A minor change to the game won't make or break lower leagues like it will the top .1%
your probably right, this patch would have been so small, that it would probably not even matter in 9 out of 10 games even for the pros.....but the fact that they where about to nerf zerg, that was what let all the terrans hope that blizz finally realized that tvz is broken as fuck....but obviosly david kim grabs himself a bag of popcorn watches a little bit of IEM sees some terran do cute stuff with those ravens and thinks "holy fuck that raven shit is imba, no way tvz is broken, we will force those terrans into that raven shit if they want or not"
On September 01 2012 10:30 Poiple wrote: When zergs whinge David Kim comes riding in on a white horse making unnecessary changes, good to see they aren't going to make the same mistakes again and screw the game up with their over zealous "balancing"
Remember 2010 and early 2011, when Zerg was much much worse than Terran, and it took them nearly a year to get it even close to 50%?
This patch isn't even that imbalanced...and according to the article it's starting to get close to(If it's not) 50% as Terran are changing things up.
Majority of Terrans who don't have Mvp or Teaja level of skill is screwed on ladder->
To be fair, I'd say anyone under high masters won't even notice a patch change. If you're mid-masters or lower, you lose due to mistakes YOU do(Be it mismicro, macro, etc), and the other person being better.
A minor change to the game won't make or break lower leagues like it will the top .1%
your probably right, this patch would have been so small, that it would probably not even matter in 9 out of 10 games even for the pros.....but the fact that they where about to nerf zerg, that was what let all the terrans hope that blizz finally realized that tvz is broken as fuck....but obviosly david kim grabs himself a bag of popcorn watches a little bit of IEM and bases his decisions if a race is OP or not on single games, what a retard
Did you read the article at all?
He said overall winrates are stabilizing, and then to give an example of some things Terran are doing he talked about recent tournaments.
He didn't go "Well, one person is doing good, KEEPING THIS!" he went "Well, Terran OVERALL are bringing it back in line. Keeping this."
On September 01 2012 10:30 Poiple wrote: When zergs whinge David Kim comes riding in on a white horse making unnecessary changes, good to see they aren't going to make the same mistakes again and screw the game up with their over zealous "balancing"
As bad of a state as terran is in atm, I'm gonna go ahead and agree with this. Just stop making changes to the game and let strategies naturally get figured out.
On September 01 2012 09:48 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On September 01 2012 09:11 ZAiNs wrote:
On September 01 2012 09:08 Zealot Lord wrote:
On September 01 2012 09:03 ZAiNs wrote: I'm disappointed he didn't say anything about the stale state of PvZ .
I suspect its because there needs to be too large scale of a change to fix the lategame issues - and thus it likely will be addressed through HOTS.
Something like making Brood Lords 6 supply instead of 4 (which is kind of ridiculous) is worth considering still.
BLs are 4 supply? Wow! They are godly units and should be changed to 6 soon. I can't even imagine how to beat spread out BLs in PvZ late game. Even the pros can typically only do it with a Mothership Vortex and when the BLs/Infestors/Corruptors are all clumped up.
I'm dumb nevermind, because I think after you use up the corruptor it only costs a total of 4 supply
Yeah, according to Liquipedia they are only 4 supply after morph. That is... frightening.
LOL. Zergs have a little trouble dealing with hellions in the early game: HOLY SHIT WE GOTTA BUFF QUEENS NOW! Terrans consistently have trouble with dealing Zerg greed for 3 months: Let's wait for the metagame to shift... Oh I see godlike IMMVP can beat european zergs... Oh it's perfectly balanced now.
On September 01 2012 10:04 Jerubaal wrote: I'd just like to chime in again and remind you all to really realize that it literally doesn't matter what change Kim proposed or dismissed, there would still be the exact same number of people in here saying he's an idiot and incompetent.
Wrong; I liked David Kim before this, now I think he's just being an idiot. (spoiler: balance discussion) + Show Spoiler +
Before the queen buff TvZ was BY FAR the best match up to watch, the problem the queen change gave is that Terran is always behind in macro, and to compensate, damage to the mineral line was vital to be able to keep up with Zerg. The queen buff not only made it impossible for hellions/marines to kite queens early-game (where the damage done actually matters), but it allowed the Zerg players to be RIDICULOUSLY greedy...
Seriously, a unit that helps with macro (larva), helps with map control (creep spread), is superior to all early game air and ground unit choices the opponent can make, and it doesn't even use up a production slot.
It also takes away a lot of the decision making that made great Zergs stand out; when to build lings, when to drone. If you don't need lings to defend because you have queens, you can dedicate 100% of your larva to drone production, leaving yourself only mildly open to an all-in.
That TvZ was the best match-up is just your opinion. High horse, off it.
It's hard for terran, but I would approve of giving it time to balance. I am somewhat annoyed by the constant terran nerfing after shorter periods of time than this. (basically they will nerf terran after a couple months, just as it begins to narrow)
It was a longer period of time, but near the end in both cases you saw an evolution. It worked out fine both times, but it's not how I'd like the philosophy to be.
On September 01 2012 10:04 Jerubaal wrote: I'd just like to chime in again and remind you all to really realize that it literally doesn't matter what change Kim proposed or dismissed, there would still be the exact same number of people in here saying he's an idiot and incompetent.
Wrong; I liked David Kim before this, now I think he's just being an idiot. (spoiler: balance discussion) + Show Spoiler +
Before the queen buff TvZ was BY FAR the best match up to watch, the problem the queen change gave is that Terran is always behind in macro, and to compensate, damage to the mineral line was vital to be able to keep up with Zerg. The queen buff not only made it impossible for hellions/marines to kite queens early-game (where the damage done actually matters), but it allowed the Zerg players to be RIDICULOUSLY greedy...
Seriously, a unit that helps with macro (larva), helps with map control (creep spread), is superior to all early game air and ground unit choices the opponent can make, and it doesn't even use up a production slot.
It also takes away a lot of the decision making that made great Zergs stand out; when to build lings, when to drone. If you don't need lings to defend because you have queens, you can dedicate 100% of your larva to drone production, leaving yourself only mildly open to an all-in.
That TvZ was the best match-up is just your opinion. High horse, off it.
yes as long as there is one single person on the planet who thinks different one could allways say something is only "your own opinion", i mean if i say to shit in a glass, piss on it and then drink it isn t tasty, it would be also just my own opinion while 9999 ouf of 10000 people would agree.........you know that tvz was considered to be the most dynamic and interesting matchup to watch, so where the fuck is you point about this "just your opinion"-thing?
On September 01 2012 10:04 Jerubaal wrote: I'd just like to chime in again and remind you all to really realize that it literally doesn't matter what change Kim proposed or dismissed, there would still be the exact same number of people in here saying he's an idiot and incompetent.
Wrong; I liked David Kim before this, now I think he's just being an idiot. (spoiler: balance discussion) + Show Spoiler +
Before the queen buff TvZ was BY FAR the best match up to watch, the problem the queen change gave is that Terran is always behind in macro, and to compensate, damage to the mineral line was vital to be able to keep up with Zerg. The queen buff not only made it impossible for hellions/marines to kite queens early-game (where the damage done actually matters), but it allowed the Zerg players to be RIDICULOUSLY greedy...
Seriously, a unit that helps with macro (larva), helps with map control (creep spread), is superior to all early game air and ground unit choices the opponent can make, and it doesn't even use up a production slot.
It also takes away a lot of the decision making that made great Zergs stand out; when to build lings, when to drone. If you don't need lings to defend because you have queens, you can dedicate 100% of your larva to drone production, leaving yourself only mildly open to an all-in.
It doesn't matter what your individual opinion is. It's the aggregate opinion that is dissonant. The notion that there's a consensus community opinion and that Blizzard negligently ignores it is a myth, as is evidenced by this thread.
On September 01 2012 10:04 Jerubaal wrote: I'd just like to chime in again and remind you all to really realize that it literally doesn't matter what change Kim proposed or dismissed, there would still be the exact same number of people in here saying he's an idiot and incompetent.
Wrong; I liked David Kim before this, now I think he's just being an idiot. (spoiler: balance discussion) + Show Spoiler +
Before the queen buff TvZ was BY FAR the best match up to watch, the problem the queen change gave is that Terran is always behind in macro, and to compensate, damage to the mineral line was vital to be able to keep up with Zerg. The queen buff not only made it impossible for hellions/marines to kite queens early-game (where the damage done actually matters), but it allowed the Zerg players to be RIDICULOUSLY greedy...
Seriously, a unit that helps with macro (larva), helps with map control (creep spread), is superior to all early game air and ground unit choices the opponent can make, and it doesn't even use up a production slot.
It also takes away a lot of the decision making that made great Zergs stand out; when to build lings, when to drone. If you don't need lings to defend because you have queens, you can dedicate 100% of your larva to drone production, leaving yourself only mildly open to an all-in.
That TvZ was the best match-up is just your opinion. High horse, off it.
yes as long as there is one single person on the planet who thinks different one could allways say something is only "your own opinion", i mean if i say to shit in a glass, piss on it and then drink it isn t tasty, it would be also just my own opinion while 9999 ouf of 10000 people would agree.........you know that tvz was considered to be the most dynamic and interesting matchup to watch, so where the fuck is you point about this "just your opinion"-thing?
On September 01 2012 10:04 Jerubaal wrote: I'd just like to chime in again and remind you all to really realize that it literally doesn't matter what change Kim proposed or dismissed, there would still be the exact same number of people in here saying he's an idiot and incompetent.
Wrong; I liked David Kim before this, now I think he's just being an idiot. (spoiler: balance discussion) + Show Spoiler +
Before the queen buff TvZ was BY FAR the best match up to watch, the problem the queen change gave is that Terran is always behind in macro, and to compensate, damage to the mineral line was vital to be able to keep up with Zerg. The queen buff not only made it impossible for hellions/marines to kite queens early-game (where the damage done actually matters), but it allowed the Zerg players to be RIDICULOUSLY greedy...
Seriously, a unit that helps with macro (larva), helps with map control (creep spread), is superior to all early game air and ground unit choices the opponent can make, and it doesn't even use up a production slot.
It also takes away a lot of the decision making that made great Zergs stand out; when to build lings, when to drone. If you don't need lings to defend because you have queens, you can dedicate 100% of your larva to drone production, leaving yourself only mildly open to an all-in.
That TvZ was the best match-up is just your opinion. High horse, off it.
yes as long as there is one single person on the planet who thinks different one could allways say something is only "your own opinion", i mean if i say to shit in a glass, piss on it and then drink it isn t tasty, it would be also just my own opinion while 9999 ouf of 10000 people would agree.........you know that tvz was considered to be the most dynamic and interesting matchup to watch, so where the fuck is you point about this "just your opinion"-thing?
We feel that at this time, we should give players more opportunities to fully explore the slowly-shifting meta-game before we change the balance of the game.
Wish they just did this all the time.. players, most of the time will figure out ways to deal with any problems and on some occasions Blizzard should have just waited longer before making changes
The game would be so cool with burrow casting, khydarin amulet, and speed voids. I kind of think a lot of their balance patches were premature and Improperly reasoned
On September 01 2012 10:04 Jerubaal wrote: I'd just like to chime in again and remind you all to really realize that it literally doesn't matter what change Kim proposed or dismissed, there would still be the exact same number of people in here saying he's an idiot and incompetent.
Wrong; I liked David Kim before this, now I think he's just being an idiot. (spoiler: balance discussion) + Show Spoiler +
Before the queen buff TvZ was BY FAR the best match up to watch, the problem the queen change gave is that Terran is always behind in macro, and to compensate, damage to the mineral line was vital to be able to keep up with Zerg. The queen buff not only made it impossible for hellions/marines to kite queens early-game (where the damage done actually matters), but it allowed the Zerg players to be RIDICULOUSLY greedy...
Seriously, a unit that helps with macro (larva), helps with map control (creep spread), is superior to all early game air and ground unit choices the opponent can make, and it doesn't even use up a production slot.
It also takes away a lot of the decision making that made great Zergs stand out; when to build lings, when to drone. If you don't need lings to defend because you have queens, you can dedicate 100% of your larva to drone production, leaving yourself only mildly open to an all-in.
That TvZ was the best match-up is just your opinion. High horse, off it.
yes as long as there is one single person on the planet who thinks different one could allways say something is only "your own opinion", i mean if i say to shit in a glass, piss on it and then drink it isn t tasty, it would be also just my own opinion while 9999 ouf of 10000 people would agree.........you know that tvz was considered to be the most dynamic and interesting matchup to watch, so where the fuck is you point about this "just your opinion"-thing?
You say "was" has it changed?
well i didn t say "was", it was inoyou who said this, but i know what he means....
i was discussing tvz with a friend lately (i m a 1300 + master terran and so is he) why every terran nowadays plays helions cloaked banshee even tough zergs know everyone plays it.....its because you can t play anything else as a terra (besides some cheese and allins)...and as soon as zergs realise that they will exploid it hard....look at leenok mlg, he had no idea (based on scouting) that there are cloaked banshees coming but he allready placed a sporecrawler in every base and even placed two sporecrawlers next to his spinecrawlers to defend his creep....he was the only zerg i saw at mlg that really did expoid the fact that terran can only go helion cloaked bansheed and just prepared perfectly for it.....and thats just boring, just as boring as zvp where p can only ffe......thats why inoyou was talking about (i think), and terrans get just roflstomped at the 17 minute mark with a bunch of a-click ultras
On September 01 2012 10:04 Jerubaal wrote: I'd just like to chime in again and remind you all to really realize that it literally doesn't matter what change Kim proposed or dismissed, there would still be the exact same number of people in here saying he's an idiot and incompetent.
Wrong; I liked David Kim before this, now I think he's just being an idiot. (spoiler: balance discussion) + Show Spoiler +
Before the queen buff TvZ was BY FAR the best match up to watch, the problem the queen change gave is that Terran is always behind in macro, and to compensate, damage to the mineral line was vital to be able to keep up with Zerg. The queen buff not only made it impossible for hellions/marines to kite queens early-game (where the damage done actually matters), but it allowed the Zerg players to be RIDICULOUSLY greedy...
Seriously, a unit that helps with macro (larva), helps with map control (creep spread), is superior to all early game air and ground unit choices the opponent can make, and it doesn't even use up a production slot.
It also takes away a lot of the decision making that made great Zergs stand out; when to build lings, when to drone. If you don't need lings to defend because you have queens, you can dedicate 100% of your larva to drone production, leaving yourself only mildly open to an all-in.
That TvZ was the best match-up is just your opinion. High horse, off it.
yes as long as there is one single person on the planet who thinks different one could allways say something is only "your own opinion", i mean if i say to shit in a glass, piss on it and then drink it isn t tasty, it would be also just my own opinion while 9999 ouf of 10000 people would agree.........you know that tvz was considered to be the most dynamic and interesting matchup to watch, so where the fuck is you point about this "just your opinion"-thing?
You say "was" has it changed?
well i didn t say "was", it was inoyou who said this, but i know what he means....
i was discussing tvz with a friend lately (i m a 1300 + master terran and so is he) why every terran nowadays plays helions cloaked banshee even tough zergs know everyone plays it.....its because you can t play anything else as a terra (besides some cheese and allins)...and as soon as zergs realise that they will exploid it hard....look at leenok mlg, he had no idea (based on scouting) that there are cloaked banshees coming but he allready placed a sporecrawler in every base and even placed two sporecrawlers next to his spinecrawlers to defend his creep....he was the only zerg i saw at mlg that really did expoid the fact that terran can only go helion cloaked bansheed and just prepared perfectly for it.....and thats just boring, just as boring as zvp where p can only ffe......thats why inoyou was talking about (i think), and terrans get just roflstomped at the 17 minute mark with a bunch of a-click ultras
So TvZ went from Hellion openings in almost every single game to Hellion/Banshee openings in almost every single game? Methinks balance isn't the problem here.
On September 01 2012 10:04 Jerubaal wrote: I'd just like to chime in again and remind you all to really realize that it literally doesn't matter what change Kim proposed or dismissed, there would still be the exact same number of people in here saying he's an idiot and incompetent.
Wrong; I liked David Kim before this, now I think he's just being an idiot. (spoiler: balance discussion) + Show Spoiler +
Before the queen buff TvZ was BY FAR the best match up to watch, the problem the queen change gave is that Terran is always behind in macro, and to compensate, damage to the mineral line was vital to be able to keep up with Zerg. The queen buff not only made it impossible for hellions/marines to kite queens early-game (where the damage done actually matters), but it allowed the Zerg players to be RIDICULOUSLY greedy...
Seriously, a unit that helps with macro (larva), helps with map control (creep spread), is superior to all early game air and ground unit choices the opponent can make, and it doesn't even use up a production slot.
It also takes away a lot of the decision making that made great Zergs stand out; when to build lings, when to drone. If you don't need lings to defend because you have queens, you can dedicate 100% of your larva to drone production, leaving yourself only mildly open to an all-in.
That TvZ was the best match-up is just your opinion. High horse, off it.
yes as long as there is one single person on the planet who thinks different one could allways say something is only "your own opinion", i mean if i say to shit in a glass, piss on it and then drink it isn t tasty, it would be also just my own opinion while 9999 ouf of 10000 people would agree.........you know that tvz was considered to be the most dynamic and interesting matchup to watch, so where the fuck is you point about this "just your opinion"-thing?
You say "was" has it changed?
well i didn t say "was", it was inoyou who said this, but i know what he means....
i was discussing tvz with a friend lately (i m a 1300 + master terran and so is he) why every terran nowadays plays helions cloaked banshee even tough zergs know everyone plays it.....its because you can t play anything else as a terra (besides some cheese and allins)...and as soon as zergs realise that they will exploid it hard....look at leenok mlg, he had no idea (based on scouting) that there are cloaked banshees coming but he allready placed a sporecrawler in every base and even placed two sporecrawlers next to his spinecrawlers to defend his creep....he was the only zerg i saw at mlg that really did expoid the fact that terran can only go helion cloaked bansheed and just prepared perfectly for it.....and thats just boring, just as boring as zvp where p can only ffe......thats why inoyou was talking about (i think), and terrans get just roflstomped at the 17 minute mark with a bunch of a-click ultras
Alright, so first of all, no it's not the only viable opening (Until pro-level, and maybe even there,i cant be sure of that). in masters you can still do combatshield pushes for example, but also most other openings are still viable, as long as you make sure to scout for a roachbling allin and make enough bunkers.
it's a really good opening tho (hellion/banshee), because it forces the zerg to not only drone(you need spores or overseers+extra queens, and you need lings or roaches to keep the hellions away from your mineral lines), while you get a great economy behind it (3cc) and gives you map control until mutas or infestors are out. The reason zergs arent exploiting it hard, is because it's a solid opener.. it can actually hold roachbling allins with good control, and you can transition into either mech or marinetank or even pure bio after it with a great economy.
and it's just amazing how people seem to think that there was a million more other openings before the patch... most games that wasn't a allin pre-patch was a hellion opener to contain the zerg on 2base while either taking a fast third and get a big advantage - or preparing a slightly later allin.
On September 01 2012 07:39 Netsky wrote: Why are people posting links to random foreigner tournament results after the queen buff? This means absolutely nothing.
They are balancing around the highest level of gameplay - that is GSL Code S (with some influence from Code A I'm sure...and soon to be the OSL/other Korean leagues). Not foreigners, or foreigner tournaments. There wasn't, and current isn't a significant drop in win rates for TvZ, or an under representation of Terran for extended period of time in GSL Code S.
Unless something drastically changes in HotS, you are never going to see balanced win rates for Terran foreigners. Terran is significantly harder to play both in terms of mechanics (physical) and strategy (mental) than the other 2 races. Terran is fine, but you need to be at the highest levels of skill. I personally think this isn't a problem, and I don't think they should be balancing the game around foreigners.
Yes but, for example, designing the basketball court's dimensions to keep things competitive for high level basketball play (NBA of course) is fine. But designing the court to make sure every defense can contain Michael Jordan is not, but that's what Blizzard is doing. They are looking at the very tip-top terran's pulling off great plays, and basing SC2 patches off of that. They don't seem to be considering that those players earned those wins not because the other race was strategically inferior, but because those few terran player(s) are just ahead of the curve (and continue to find ways to get ahead). It doesn't mean that the sport/e-sport is imbalanced, and thus it doesn't mean they need to patch the game everytime MVP's, MMA's, and Taeja's own up a tournament. You're going to have superstar players in any game, but that doesn't mean you balance the game around their specific talents, because then you're punishing them for excelling.
I can understand why they want to hold on this balance patch because HOTS beta is coming out really soon. Any changes that tilt the balance change will undo everything they have work for up till now. The balance is indeed pretty good right now but I don't think blizzard should base Terran balance just on MVP and Taeja performance...
Love it. Glad blizzard is balancing around the top-tier and not the bottom (which i consider myself in top masters just as close as someone in bronze, i.e. no where near the lvl of the top players). This is what ruined many other 'competitive' games was balance around lower tier players *cough* WoW *cough* glad they aren't making the same mistakes.
PS. every race has a player to bitch about. I.e. X vs Y, X: i don't know how to beat Y... Y: just play like so and so... X: if i had so and so's ability i wouldn't have a problem... Y: blizzard doesn't balance for noobs... X: glad they don't
On September 01 2012 12:13 Prplppleatr wrote: Love it. Glad blizzard is balancing around the top-tier and not the bottom (which i consider myself in top masters just as close as someone in bronze, i.e. no where near the lvl of the top players). This is what ruined many other 'competitive' games was balance around lower tier players *cough* WoW *cough* glad they aren't making the same mistakes.
PS. every race has a player to bitch about. I.e. X vs Y, X: i don't know how to beat Y... Y: just play like so and so... X: if i had so and so's ability i wouldn't have a problem... Y: blizzard doesn't balance for noobs... X: glad they don't
You mean theyre balancing around the fact that MVP beat some European zergs who became all good after the patch.
On September 01 2012 12:13 Prplppleatr wrote: Love it. Glad blizzard is balancing around the top-tier and not the bottom (which i consider myself in top masters just as close as someone in bronze, i.e. no where near the lvl of the top players). This is what ruined many other 'competitive' games was balance around lower tier players *cough* WoW *cough* glad they aren't making the same mistakes.
PS. every race has a player to bitch about. I.e. X vs Y, X: i don't know how to beat Y... Y: just play like so and so... X: if i had so and so's ability i wouldn't have a problem... Y: blizzard doesn't balance for noobs... X: glad they don't
You mean theyre balancing around the fact that MVP beat some European zergs who became all good after the patch.
or around the fact that a Eu terran destroyed a korean 3 time code S champion?
Umm...I think the way they are balancing the game is kind of ridiculous, but then again people have always complained about balance, then figure new things out, although I really do think Terran ravens need some kind of buff.
I actually agree with the balance team for once. I think that terran does need more time to come up with more strats because I have been seeing so much success with heavy blue flame hellion play into mech (That isn't that APM intensive mind you).
On September 01 2012 13:22 blug wrote: I'm a zerg player I'll admit it.
I actually agree with the balance team for once. I think that terran does need more time to come up with more strats because I have been seeing so much success with heavy blue flame hellion play into mech (That isn't that APM intensive mind you).
This sort of reasoning can just be thrown right back at the Zergs. Why did they not just take more time to "discover" the metagame and strategies that were effective? Instead we saw massive QQ campaigns used to great success, which also ended up in various nerfs to Terrans and a plethora of buffs to Zergs.
Now all of a sudden Blizzard is all about waiting for the metagame to develop. When the game first came out, Terrans had access to a lot more strategies and their metagame developed extremely quickly. It took a while for the other 2 races to catch up. Now that the metagame has stabilized a bit, throwing a massive buff to a (Z) race takes much longer for the other opposing races to develop strategies against it. With all the Terran complaints and the disproportionate distribution of races at the top level, we see Blizzard's response as - Let the metagame develop before we make any massive changes. Now why didn' t they do that before the Queen/OL buff?
I remember back in the day when the command center slide was found. It gave you 2x as much mineral mining rate. I won like 100% of my games as terran, and was like #1 on ladder. Blizzard said,"We don't think the CC slide changes much, so we're not fixing it."
On September 01 2012 14:02 GoodNewsJim wrote: Blizzard has little clue about balance,
I remember back in the day when the command center slide was found. It gave you 2x as much mineral mining rate. I won like 100% of my games as terran, and was like #1 on ladder. Blizzard said,"We don't think the CC slide changes much, so we're not fixing it."
,CrazyJim(may make a comeback in SC2)
This is like.... WAAY old school BW days... and I dont recall them ever discussing balance in those days.
On September 01 2012 14:02 GoodNewsJim wrote: Blizzard has little clue about balance,
I remember back in the day when the command center slide was found. It gave you 2x as much mineral mining rate. I won like 100% of my games as terran, and was like #1 on ladder. Blizzard said,"We don't think the CC slide changes much, so we're not fixing it."
,CrazyJim(may make a comeback in SC2)
This is like.... WAAY old school BW days... and I dont recall them ever discussing balance in those days.
Indeed, I remember it getting was fixed pretty quickly too.
The problem with the balance of the game is that every race has a viable T1 versatile unit except Zerg.
100% mass marine is decent against everything.
100% mass stalker is decent against everything.
If Zerg made anything other than 4+ queens, they wouldn't be able to deal with Hellion Banshee.
There is no way for Zerg to experiment with builds and come up with something that deals with Terran because Zerg cannot reliably beat Terran with early aggression.
For SC2 to exist as a competitive activity, you cannot make early aggression unbeatable or a coinflip.
If you want to revert the changes, give overlords a skill that gives them 2x movespeed for 10 seconds.
i dont care if the answer is "terran need to play better". I expect to have to play better to win regardless of my opponent, or my opponents race. Whether that's just "better" in general, or "mechanically you have to do more than they do because they play _____". What bothers me is the inconsistency.
On September 01 2012 14:52 claraa wrote: hmm...people arguing that MVP vs foreign zergs surely didn't forget that Kas beat Nestea right?
It was one match-up that Nestea clearly should have won. It had everything to do with Nestea sucking a fat dick in terms of his gameplay more than Kas outplaying him.
DK is a hypocrite. I mean why not have this attitude toward balancing from the way beginning? I mean obviously some things were considered imba and needed attention but they have always punished innovative plays --> using units outside of its "expected" role etc. That was what made SC:BW so much more entertaining (like recalls were originally a defensive spell but later became an offensive one - if Blizz of this time was balancing BW, we may never ever seen recall drops given their logic toward balancing SC2 at this point in time.. nor see cloud of science vessels..)
Like many have pointed out Blizzard pretty much killed innovation in this game because theres hardly anything left to explore now. Now they expect people to come up with innovative plays when the game is so god damn linear. Its like they are back peddling.
Also they always need to remember that a players skill =/= racial balance. You cant just take what MVP has achieved and call it a day. Not your everyday T is an IMMVP.. Like how some people say "hey TvP is fine, just look at Taeja". Balance often makes execution easier but some of the things the two forementioned players pull out are just flat out impossible for your everyday ladder T.
tldr; I guess its a good thing since ravens weren't nerfed *rolleye*.
If i would be David Kim after reading this so called thread i would completly ignore any kind of community feedback. It's absolutly disgusting how much QQ every action Blizzard performs generates. They do something - bad, they decide to wait - bad. Compare balance at this point of game to what it was at start and ask yourself - does Blizzard really do so bad job?
On September 01 2012 15:02 Narw wrote: If i would be David Kim after reading this so called thread i would completly ignore any kind of community feedback. It's absolutly disgusting how much QQ every action Blizzard performs generates. They do something - bad, they decide to wait - bad. Compare balance at this point of game to what it was at start and ask yourself - does Blizzard really do so bad job?
Disgusting crybabies.
Yes. They've done a bad job. So many units go unused or fill very niche roles compared to the early days of SC2. People always play the same forced style blizzard wants you to play. Why? nearly everything that the community/pros innovated have been patched out of existence.
On September 01 2012 15:02 Narw wrote: If i would be David Kim after reading this so called thread i would completly ignore any kind of community feedback. It's absolutly disgusting how much QQ every action Blizzard performs generates. They do something - bad, they decide to wait - bad. Compare balance at this point of game to what it was at start and ask yourself - does Blizzard really do so bad job?
Disgusting crybabies.
Yes. They've done a bad job. So many units go unused or fill very niche roles compared to the early days of SC2. People always play the same forced style blizzard wants you to play. Why? nearly everything that the community/pros innovated have been patched out of existence.
I'm really sorry i don't see those awesome innovative 4 rax reaper builds anymore. Really i am.
On September 01 2012 14:30 Cranium wrote: The problem with the balance of the game is that every race has a viable T1 versatile unit except Zerg.
100% mass marine is decent against everything.
100% mass stalker is decent against everything.
If Zerg made anything other than 4+ queens, they wouldn't be able to deal with Hellion Banshee.
There is no way for Zerg to experiment with builds and come up with something that deals with Terran because Zerg cannot reliably beat Terran with early aggression.
For SC2 to exist as a competitive activity, you cannot make early aggression unbeatable or a coinflip.
If you want to revert the changes, give overlords a skill that gives them 2x movespeed for 10 seconds.
Do you even remember TvZ before patch? It was 10x times better to play/watch. Now it's MOSTLY passive play for the first ~10-12 minutes. Queens up, spread creep. Terrans for hellions deny some shit and go for 3rd.
Before patch it was madness, constant agression from both sides(Zerg was more on defensive and it was quite tough, yes..not imbalanced). The only reason I hate the queen patch is because it changed the whole gameplay, it made turtling so much better and viable for zerg.. and now for T as well.
TvZ was so freaking awesome, it's still good but it won't be DRG vs MMA lvl anytime soon -,-
On September 01 2012 15:02 Narw wrote: If i would be David Kim after reading this so called thread i would completly ignore any kind of community feedback. It's absolutly disgusting how much QQ every action Blizzard performs generates. They do something - bad, they decide to wait - bad. Compare balance at this point of game to what it was at start and ask yourself - does Blizzard really do so bad job?
Disgusting crybabies.
Yes. They've done a bad job. So many units go unused or fill very niche roles compared to the early days of SC2. People always play the same forced style blizzard wants you to play. Why? nearly everything that the community/pros innovated have been patched out of existence.
Wait, which units go unused? Least used units are hydra, battlecruiser, and carrier... which have largely gone unchanged. Reaper is maybe your only argument, but everybody knows old reaper was simply too good.
Every other unit sees a tremendous amount of usage all the time.
On September 01 2012 15:02 Narw wrote: If i would be David Kim after reading this so called thread i would completly ignore any kind of community feedback. It's absolutly disgusting how much QQ every action Blizzard performs generates. They do something - bad, they decide to wait - bad. Compare balance at this point of game to what it was at start and ask yourself - does Blizzard really do so bad job?
Disgusting crybabies.
Yes. They've done a bad job. So many units go unused or fill very niche roles compared to the early days of SC2. People always play the same forced style blizzard wants you to play. Why? nearly everything that the community/pros innovated have been patched out of existence.
I'm really sorry i don't see those awesome innovative 4 rax reaper builds anymore. Really i am.
Should a unit become underpowered and underused because of one early overpowered build? Would that build be too powerful with the increased roach and queen range that have been added after in addition to a higher skill level and understanding of the zerg players? Could the reaper have been buffed in some other way to make it useful while avoiding the 4 rax reaper problem?
I hope blizzard doesn't do the same thing to the hots units if they happen to be in a powerful strategy early in the games life. It would be a shame to buy the expansion so you can use the new units and then they become to weak to use like the reaper.
On September 01 2012 15:02 Narw wrote: If i would be David Kim after reading this so called thread i would completly ignore any kind of community feedback. It's absolutly disgusting how much QQ every action Blizzard performs generates. They do something - bad, they decide to wait - bad. Compare balance at this point of game to what it was at start and ask yourself - does Blizzard really do so bad job?
Disgusting crybabies.
Yes. They've done a bad job. So many units go unused or fill very niche roles compared to the early days of SC2. People always play the same forced style blizzard wants you to play. Why? nearly everything that the community/pros innovated have been patched out of existence.
Wait, which units go unused? Least used units are hydra, battlecruiser, and carrier... which have largely gone unchanged. Reaper is maybe your only argument, but everybody knows old reaper was simply too good.
Every other unit sees a tremendous amount of usage all the time.
wish i had known about this a week ago instead of blizzard lying and pretending they were actually going to fix terran...time for a new game...and game company.
Any takers on the bet that the next Blizzard patch will.... actually nerf Terran? I'd say the odds are 50/50. "We have seen how powerful Mech is, as Mvp has shown, therefore we must nerf it."
Holy shit because MVP made TvZ work against Europeans, all of a sudden the game is balanced? Blizzard blows my mind so many times, this is fucking ridiculous.
On September 01 2012 15:35 Whatson wrote: Holy shit because MVP made TvZ work against Europeans, all of a sudden the game is balanced? Blizzard blows my mind so many times, this is fucking ridiculous.
are you surprised? they want you to buy the expansion.
On September 01 2012 15:35 Whatson wrote: Holy shit because MVP made TvZ work against Europeans, all of a sudden the game is balanced? Blizzard blows my mind so many times, this is fucking ridiculous.
And at the same time they made european TvZ work against Nestea?
BC damage buff would be nice since they admit it needs one > implementing for HOTS. It makes me really angry and sad when I fight to stay alive all game, get 4 bases, save gas/spend it on battlecruisers all game long and zerg simply holds down corruptor hotkey and smashes them in seconds.
On September 01 2012 15:02 Narw wrote: If i would be David Kim after reading this so called thread i would completly ignore any kind of community feedback. It's absolutly disgusting how much QQ every action Blizzard performs generates. They do something - bad, they decide to wait - bad. Compare balance at this point of game to what it was at start and ask yourself - does Blizzard really do so bad job?
Disgusting crybabies.
Yes. They've done a bad job. So many units go unused or fill very niche roles compared to the early days of SC2. People always play the same forced style blizzard wants you to play. Why? nearly everything that the community/pros innovated have been patched out of existence.
I'm really sorry i don't see those awesome innovative 4 rax reaper builds anymore. Really i am.
Should a unit become underpowered and underused because of one early overpowered build? Would that build be too powerful with the increased roach and queen range that have been added after in addition to a higher skill level and understanding of the zerg players? Could the reaper have been buffed in some other way to make it useful while avoiding the 4 rax reaper problem?
I hope blizzard doesn't do the same thing to the hots units if they happen to be in a powerful strategy early in the games life. It would be a shame to buy the expansion so you can use the new units and then they become to weak to use like the reaper.
Exactly. They outright killed it. Why not let the players figure it out or tweak it ever so slightly that wouldn't completely kill the unit? Another example would be how Ps were figuring out 1-1-1s then out of nowhere immortals got a range buff to help against such a push that still to this day plagues the Zs more so than Ts.
Just as Zs were dealing with all sorts of early pressure from Ts (the ones that did really stood apart from the rest e.g. DRG) they gave the queen a range 5 buff.
On September 01 2012 15:35 Whatson wrote: Holy shit because MVP made TvZ work against Europeans, all of a sudden the game is balanced? Blizzard blows my mind so many times, this is fucking ridiculous.
And at the same time they made european TvZ work against Nestea?
oh sorry, i shouldn't disturb you in that bubble
What bubble? I don't consider Nestea that good of a Zerg anymore. Do tell me how many zergs got into IEM ro4? Sorry to burst your bubble idiot.
On September 01 2012 15:35 Whatson wrote: Holy shit because MVP made TvZ work against Europeans, all of a sudden the game is balanced? Blizzard blows my mind so many times, this is fucking ridiculous.
And at the same time they made european TvZ work against Nestea?
oh sorry, i shouldn't disturb you in that bubble
Nestea has lost sets and games to European Terrans before the queen patch dumbass. Fuck off if you can't bring an actual argument.
On September 01 2012 15:35 Whatson wrote: Holy shit because MVP made TvZ work against Europeans, all of a sudden the game is balanced? Blizzard blows my mind so many times, this is fucking ridiculous.
And at the same time they made european TvZ work against Nestea?
oh sorry, i shouldn't disturb you in that bubble
What bubble? I don't consider Nestea that good of a Zerg anymore. Do tell me how many zergs got into IEM ro4? Sorry to burst your bubble idiot.
You dont consider Nestea a good zerg anymore? wtf lol everyone knows he isn't best zerg in the world anymore, but he is still easily top zerg...^^ You cant possibly deny that?
The "bubble" is the one where you are ignorant enough to think blizzard balances the game by watching 1 terran win one tournament..while you ignore everything else, like terrans getting back to even winrates again, a ton of terrans saying they dont feel it's nearly as bad now, and they feel like they can play against zergs again with new builds.
MVP winning means NOTHING, it's 1 player, same goes for Kas winning against nestea, but the fact that you picked one of them and more or less say "This one should be expected! it doesn't count, he is top korean and they are foreigners" and at the same time say the other one that is a foreigner crushing a 3 time Code S champion (And still Code S) isn't surprising because the zerg isn't very good.. it's just amazing..
On September 01 2012 15:35 Whatson wrote: Holy shit because MVP made TvZ work against Europeans, all of a sudden the game is balanced? Blizzard blows my mind so many times, this is fucking ridiculous.
And at the same time they made european TvZ work against Nestea?
oh sorry, i shouldn't disturb you in that bubble
What bubble? I don't consider Nestea that good of a Zerg anymore. Do tell me how many zergs got into IEM ro4? Sorry to burst your bubble idiot.
You dont consider Nestea a good zerg anymore? wtf lol everyone knows he isn't best zerg in the world anymore, but he is still easily top zerg...^^ You cant possibly deny that?
The "bubble" is the one where you are ignorant enough to think blizzard balances the game by watching 1 terran win one tournament..while you ignore everything else, like terrans getting back to even winrates again, a ton of terrans saying they dont feel it's nearly as bad now, and they feel like they can play against zergs again with new builds.
MVP winning means NOTHING, it's 1 player, same goes for Kas winning against nestea, but the fact that you picked one of them and more or less say "This one should be expected! it doesn't count, he is top korean and they are foreigners" and at the same time say the other one that is a foreigner crushing a 3 time Code S champion (And still Code S) isn't surprising because the zerg isn't very good.. it's just amazing..
you havnt watched sc2 in 6 months or what? nestea hasnt been a top zerg in a long time. tvz is shit and imbalanced...when 90% of people complain about a matchup something must be done
On September 01 2012 15:35 Whatson wrote: Holy shit because MVP made TvZ work against Europeans, all of a sudden the game is balanced? Blizzard blows my mind so many times, this is fucking ridiculous.
And at the same time they made european TvZ work against Nestea?
oh sorry, i shouldn't disturb you in that bubble
What bubble? I don't consider Nestea that good of a Zerg anymore. Do tell me how many zergs got into IEM ro4? Sorry to burst your bubble idiot.
You dont consider Nestea a good zerg anymore? wtf lol everyone knows he isn't best zerg in the world anymore, but he is still easily top zerg...^^ You cant possibly deny that?
The "bubble" is the one where you are ignorant enough to think blizzard balances the game by watching 1 terran win one tournament..while you ignore everything else, like terrans getting back to even winrates again, a ton of terrans saying they dont feel it's nearly as bad now, and they feel like they can play against zergs again with new builds.
MVP winning means NOTHING, it's 1 player, same goes for Kas winning against nestea, but the fact that you picked one of them and more or less say "This one should be expected! it doesn't count, he is top korean and they are foreigners" and at the same time say the other one that is a foreigner crushing a 3 time Code S champion (And still Code S) isn't surprising because the zerg isn't very good.. it's just amazing..
you havnt watched sc2 in 6 months or what? nestea hasnt been a top zerg in a long time. tvz is shit and imbalanced...when 90% of people complain about a matchup something must be done
Something will only be done when the 90% is protoss or zerg. Blizzard hates terran.
On September 01 2012 15:35 Whatson wrote: Holy shit because MVP made TvZ work against Europeans, all of a sudden the game is balanced? Blizzard blows my mind so many times, this is fucking ridiculous.
And at the same time they made european TvZ work against Nestea?
oh sorry, i shouldn't disturb you in that bubble
What bubble? I don't consider Nestea that good of a Zerg anymore. Do tell me how many zergs got into IEM ro4? Sorry to burst your bubble idiot.
You dont consider Nestea a good zerg anymore? wtf lol everyone knows he isn't best zerg in the world anymore, but he is still easily top zerg...^^ You cant possibly deny that?
The "bubble" is the one where you are ignorant enough to think blizzard balances the game by watching 1 terran win one tournament..while you ignore everything else, like terrans getting back to even winrates again, a ton of terrans saying they dont feel it's nearly as bad now, and they feel like they can play against zergs again with new builds.
MVP winning means NOTHING, it's 1 player, same goes for Kas winning against nestea, but the fact that you picked one of them and more or less say "This one should be expected! it doesn't count, he is top korean and they are foreigners" and at the same time say the other one that is a foreigner crushing a 3 time Code S champion (And still Code S) isn't surprising because the zerg isn't very good.. it's just amazing..
Top zerg? NesTea has been one of the worst code S zergs in ZvT for a very long time. About the time when the game was kinda figured out enough that players with subpar mechanics aren't able to win championships anymore. A lot of better koreans terrans lost matches or games (Keen, fOrGG etc can't remember them all) to inferior european zergs, Mvp being able to win when Nerchio can't handle the pressure anymore won't discard that.
On September 01 2012 15:35 Whatson wrote: Holy shit because MVP made TvZ work against Europeans, all of a sudden the game is balanced? Blizzard blows my mind so many times, this is fucking ridiculous.
And at the same time they made european TvZ work against Nestea?
oh sorry, i shouldn't disturb you in that bubble
Nestea has lost sets and games to European Terrans before the queen patch dumbass. Fuck off if you can't bring an actual argument.
Never said he hasn't
And i would just like to point out that "Player X won/lost against player Y in a best of 3/5/7 that means the XVY matchup is balanced/imbalanced" is not a fucking argument, i was pointing out how stupid it was... it's something that no one with half a brain ACTUALLY cares about, and neither does blizzard.
It's just annoying to read some people actually be stupid enough to say "MVP crushing zergs means nothing, he would beat them if the game was balanced or not balanced, doesn't matter" and then choose to ignore Kas crushing a Code S zerg.. neither of them matters, it's just annoying to see people be that stupid and biased.
On September 01 2012 15:35 Whatson wrote: Holy shit because MVP made TvZ work against Europeans, all of a sudden the game is balanced? Blizzard blows my mind so many times, this is fucking ridiculous.
And at the same time they made european TvZ work against Nestea?
oh sorry, i shouldn't disturb you in that bubble
What bubble? I don't consider Nestea that good of a Zerg anymore. Do tell me how many zergs got into IEM ro4? Sorry to burst your bubble idiot.
You dont consider Nestea a good zerg anymore? wtf lol everyone knows he isn't best zerg in the world anymore, but he is still easily top zerg...^^ You cant possibly deny that?
The "bubble" is the one where you are ignorant enough to think blizzard balances the game by watching 1 terran win one tournament..while you ignore everything else, like terrans getting back to even winrates again, a ton of terrans saying they dont feel it's nearly as bad now, and they feel like they can play against zergs again with new builds.
MVP winning means NOTHING, it's 1 player, same goes for Kas winning against nestea, but the fact that you picked one of them and more or less say "This one should be expected! it doesn't count, he is top korean and they are foreigners" and at the same time say the other one that is a foreigner crushing a 3 time Code S champion (And still Code S) isn't surprising because the zerg isn't very good.. it's just amazing..
Top zerg? NesTea has been one of the worst code S zergs in ZvT for a very long time. About the time when the game was kinda figured out enough that players with subpar mechanics aren't able to win championships anymore. A lot of better koreans terrans lost matches or games (Keen, fOrGG etc can't remember them all) to inferior european zergs, Mvp being able to win when Nerchio can't handle the pressure anymore won't discard that.
I dont give a shit who wins against who at IEM, THAT is my fucking point.. Oh i'm sorry, it seems i didn't get the PM where it says Code S is no longer enough to call someone "Top", sorry for that, i should've known Code S is now mid-tier players mostly.
On September 01 2012 15:35 Whatson wrote: Holy shit because MVP made TvZ work against Europeans, all of a sudden the game is balanced? Blizzard blows my mind so many times, this is fucking ridiculous.
And at the same time they made european TvZ work against Nestea?
oh sorry, i shouldn't disturb you in that bubble
What bubble? I don't consider Nestea that good of a Zerg anymore. Do tell me how many zergs got into IEM ro4? Sorry to burst your bubble idiot.
You dont consider Nestea a good zerg anymore? wtf lol everyone knows he isn't best zerg in the world anymore, but he is still easily top zerg...^^ You cant possibly deny that?
The "bubble" is the one where you are ignorant enough to think blizzard balances the game by watching 1 terran win one tournament..while you ignore everything else, like terrans getting back to even winrates again, a ton of terrans saying they dont feel it's nearly as bad now, and they feel like they can play against zergs again with new builds.
MVP winning means NOTHING, it's 1 player, same goes for Kas winning against nestea, but the fact that you picked one of them and more or less say "This one should be expected! it doesn't count, he is top korean and they are foreigners" and at the same time say the other one that is a foreigner crushing a 3 time Code S champion (And still Code S) isn't surprising because the zerg isn't very good.. it's just amazing..
Top zerg? NesTea has been one of the worst code S zergs in ZvT for a very long time. About the time when the game was kinda figured out enough that players with subpar mechanics aren't able to win championships anymore. A lot of better koreans terrans lost matches or games (Keen, fOrGG etc can't remember them all) to inferior european zergs, Mvp being able to win when Nerchio can't handle the pressure anymore won't discard that.
How can you list forGG? What has he done that is notable in SC2? He was big in BW, but he hasnt done anything in SC2. Saying hes a top T while nestea is a subpar zerg is straight dishonest.
On September 01 2012 15:35 Whatson wrote: Holy shit because MVP made TvZ work against Europeans, all of a sudden the game is balanced? Blizzard blows my mind so many times, this is fucking ridiculous.
And at the same time they made european TvZ work against Nestea?
oh sorry, i shouldn't disturb you in that bubble
What bubble? I don't consider Nestea that good of a Zerg anymore. Do tell me how many zergs got into IEM ro4? Sorry to burst your bubble idiot.
You dont consider Nestea a good zerg anymore? wtf lol everyone knows he isn't best zerg in the world anymore, but he is still easily top zerg...^^ You cant possibly deny that?
The "bubble" is the one where you are ignorant enough to think blizzard balances the game by watching 1 terran win one tournament..while you ignore everything else, like terrans getting back to even winrates again, a ton of terrans saying they dont feel it's nearly as bad now, and they feel like they can play against zergs again with new builds.
MVP winning means NOTHING, it's 1 player, same goes for Kas winning against nestea, but the fact that you picked one of them and more or less say "This one should be expected! it doesn't count, he is top korean and they are foreigners" and at the same time say the other one that is a foreigner crushing a 3 time Code S champion (And still Code S) isn't surprising because the zerg isn't very good.. it's just amazing..
you havnt watched sc2 in 6 months or what? nestea hasnt been a top zerg in a long time. tvz is shit and imbalanced...when 90% of people complain about a matchup something must be done
I have. once again, sorry i forgot that Code S is mid tier players nowadays, forgive me ^^
90% of people do not complain, Most people did complain after the patch, it has been quite some time, and winrates are going back towards 50/50 again, not there yet, but it's getting there
Btw, i'm 100% in support of the patch changes, i want them to patch it too... What i am tired of is seeing idiots make idiotic comments such as "MVP wins = no patch" it's not as simple as that, and anyone that thinks so is actually an idiot.
On September 01 2012 15:35 Whatson wrote: Holy shit because MVP made TvZ work against Europeans, all of a sudden the game is balanced? Blizzard blows my mind so many times, this is fucking ridiculous.
And at the same time they made european TvZ work against Nestea?
oh sorry, i shouldn't disturb you in that bubble
What bubble? I don't consider Nestea that good of a Zerg anymore. Do tell me how many zergs got into IEM ro4? Sorry to burst your bubble idiot.
You dont consider Nestea a good zerg anymore? wtf lol everyone knows he isn't best zerg in the world anymore, but he is still easily top zerg...^^ You cant possibly deny that?
The "bubble" is the one where you are ignorant enough to think blizzard balances the game by watching 1 terran win one tournament..while you ignore everything else, like terrans getting back to even winrates again, a ton of terrans saying they dont feel it's nearly as bad now, and they feel like they can play against zergs again with new builds.
MVP winning means NOTHING, it's 1 player, same goes for Kas winning against nestea, but the fact that you picked one of them and more or less say "This one should be expected! it doesn't count, he is top korean and they are foreigners" and at the same time say the other one that is a foreigner crushing a 3 time Code S champion (And still Code S) isn't surprising because the zerg isn't very good.. it's just amazing..
you havnt watched sc2 in 6 months or what? nestea hasnt been a top zerg in a long time. tvz is shit and imbalanced...when 90% of people complain about a matchup something must be done
I have. once again, sorry i forgot that Code S is mid tier players nowadays, forgive me ^^
90% of people do not complain, Most people did complain after the patch, it has been quite some time, and winrates are going back towards 50/50 again, not there yet, but it's getting there
Btw, i'm 100% in support of the patch changes, i want them to patch it too... What i am tired of is seeing idiots make idiotic comments such as "MVP wins = no patch" it's not as simple as that, and anyone that thinks so is actually an idiot.
sorry to dissapoint you, but blizzard is simply NOT capable of balancing their own game. it just wont happen. the truth is they did look at just one tournament, and simply said "tvz fine"
game is dead/will be dead competetivly soon after hots launch.
I was going to type out an intelligent response, something along the lines of "Nestea was losing infestors left and right, and not dealing well with Kas' multitask and aggression", and then I realized that he was zerg, and everything made sense.
On September 01 2012 15:35 Whatson wrote: Holy shit because MVP made TvZ work against Europeans, all of a sudden the game is balanced? Blizzard blows my mind so many times, this is fucking ridiculous.
And at the same time they made european TvZ work against Nestea?
oh sorry, i shouldn't disturb you in that bubble
What bubble? I don't consider Nestea that good of a Zerg anymore. Do tell me how many zergs got into IEM ro4? Sorry to burst your bubble idiot.
You dont consider Nestea a good zerg anymore? wtf lol everyone knows he isn't best zerg in the world anymore, but he is still easily top zerg...^^ You cant possibly deny that?
The "bubble" is the one where you are ignorant enough to think blizzard balances the game by watching 1 terran win one tournament..while you ignore everything else, like terrans getting back to even winrates again, a ton of terrans saying they dont feel it's nearly as bad now, and they feel like they can play against zergs again with new builds.
MVP winning means NOTHING, it's 1 player, same goes for Kas winning against nestea, but the fact that you picked one of them and more or less say "This one should be expected! it doesn't count, he is top korean and they are foreigners" and at the same time say the other one that is a foreigner crushing a 3 time Code S champion (And still Code S) isn't surprising because the zerg isn't very good.. it's just amazing..
you havnt watched sc2 in 6 months or what? nestea hasnt been a top zerg in a long time. tvz is shit and imbalanced...when 90% of people complain about a matchup something must be done
I have. once again, sorry i forgot that Code S is mid tier players nowadays, forgive me ^^
90% of people do not complain, Most people did complain after the patch, it has been quite some time, and winrates are going back towards 50/50 again, not there yet, but it's getting there
Btw, i'm 100% in support of the patch changes, i want them to patch it too... What i am tired of is seeing idiots make idiotic comments such as "MVP wins = no patch" it's not as simple as that, and anyone that thinks so is actually an idiot.
sorry to dissapoint you, but blizzard is simply NOT capable of balancing their own game. it just wont happen. the truth is they did look at just one tournament, and simply said "tvz fine"
game is dead/will be dead competetivly soon after hots launch.
How can you say the game is imbalanced? Every race is like within a few % of eachother in the matchups. That is basically as balanced as BW. Right now we are entering a protoss era of dominance, though. But that is just a natural flow that will change.
ZvP hasnt changed at all in terms of balance since the queen change, yet protoss are crushing most zergs lately. And those few months ago protoss were saying PvZ was unwinnable.
On September 01 2012 16:47 aviator116 wrote: I was going to type out an intelligent response, something along the lines of "Nestea was losing infestors left and right, and not dealing well with Kas' multitask and aggression", and then I realized that he was zerg, and everything made sense.
Lol yeah, then i was going to respond with something like "Kas was losing drops to zerglings left and right, and moving ravens without HSM or energy into broodlord/infestor/corruptor armies, and not making medivacs for his pushes and losing clumped up armies to more or less 3 fungals, lol, but then i remembered he is terran, so that shouldn't be mentioned.
On September 01 2012 10:04 Jerubaal wrote: I'd just like to chime in again and remind you all to really realize that it literally doesn't matter what change Kim proposed or dismissed, there would still be the exact same number of people in here saying he's an idiot and incompetent.
Wrong; I liked David Kim before this, now I think he's just being an idiot. (spoiler: balance discussion) + Show Spoiler +
Before the queen buff TvZ was BY FAR the best match up to watch, the problem the queen change gave is that Terran is always behind in macro, and to compensate, damage to the mineral line was vital to be able to keep up with Zerg. The queen buff not only made it impossible for hellions/marines to kite queens early-game (where the damage done actually matters), but it allowed the Zerg players to be RIDICULOUSLY greedy...
Seriously, a unit that helps with macro (larva), helps with map control (creep spread), is superior to all early game air and ground unit choices the opponent can make, and it doesn't even use up a production slot.
It also takes away a lot of the decision making that made great Zergs stand out; when to build lings, when to drone. If you don't need lings to defend because you have queens, you can dedicate 100% of your larva to drone production, leaving yourself only mildly open to an all-in.
That TvZ was the best match-up is just your opinion. High horse, off it.
It was the majority opinion.
yep, I remember many pros citing TvZ as best matchup in SC2 back then, even Protoss players like Huk agreed.
Having hellion opening every single time doesn't make for a bad matchup. It's just a standard opening. BW had those. It's how you know when a matchup has become stable and isn't ruled by shifting metagames. Even if the you found the opening boring, it allowed for a more interesting midgame than we see nowadays.
On September 01 2012 16:47 aviator116 wrote: I was going to type out an intelligent response, something along the lines of "Nestea was losing infestors left and right, and not dealing well with Kas' multitask and aggression", and then I realized that he was zerg, and everything made sense.
Lol yeah, then i was going to respond with something like "Kas was losing drops to zerglings left and right, and moving ravens without HSM or energy into broodlord/infestor/corruptor armies, and not making medivacs for his pushes and losing clumped up armies to more or less 3 fungals, lol, but then i remembered he is terran, so that shouldn't be mentioned.
I'm not going to get into a flaming argument with somebody who has to mimic my response in order to provide an argument...
On September 01 2012 16:47 aviator116 wrote: I was going to type out an intelligent response, something along the lines of "Nestea was losing infestors left and right, and not dealing well with Kas' multitask and aggression", and then I realized that he was zerg, and everything made sense.
Lol yeah, then i was going to respond with something like "Kas was losing drops to zerglings left and right, and moving ravens without HSM or energy into broodlord/infestor/corruptor armies, and not making medivacs for his pushes and losing clumped up armies to more or less 3 fungals, lol, but then i remembered he is terran, so that shouldn't be mentioned.
I'm not going to get into a flaming argument with somebody who has to mimic my response in order to provide an argument...
It's not a flaming argument, you made a dumb post that was more or less "Zerg players are bad, so one should not be surprised when they lose", You didn't have a argument, you were whining. I just responded with the same, do you see how stupid and pointless that kind of shit is?
On September 01 2012 16:47 aviator116 wrote: I was going to type out an intelligent response, something along the lines of "Nestea was losing infestors left and right, and not dealing well with Kas' multitask and aggression", and then I realized that he was zerg, and everything made sense.
Lol yeah, then i was going to respond with something like "Kas was losing drops to zerglings left and right, and moving ravens without HSM or energy into broodlord/infestor/corruptor armies, and not making medivacs for his pushes and losing clumped up armies to more or less 3 fungals, lol, but then i remembered he is terran, so that shouldn't be mentioned.
I'm not going to get into a flaming argument with somebody who has to mimic my response in order to provide an argument...
It's not a flaming argument, you made a dumb post that was more or less "Zerg players are bad, so one should not be surprised when they lose", You didn't have a argument, you were whining. I just responded with the same, do you see how stupid and pointless that kind of shit is?
Once again: I'm not going to get into a flaming argument. Have a nice day.
On September 01 2012 01:07 ELA wrote: Well, TaeJa and MVP sure did screw that up for the rest of us :D
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
... studies conclude: 90% of terrans cannot read!
Honestly, blizzard said from the very beginning, that these changes are about the highest level of play only! If you guys loose in tvz, its just because you suck, l2p!
Really, what an outrage that blizzard is looking only at the highest level of play, when they want to know if the changes they plan to balance the highest level of play are really necessary!
On September 01 2012 16:47 aviator116 wrote: I was going to type out an intelligent response, something along the lines of "Nestea was losing infestors left and right, and not dealing well with Kas' multitask and aggression", and then I realized that he was zerg, and everything made sense.
Lol yeah, then i was going to respond with something like "Kas was losing drops to zerglings left and right, and moving ravens without HSM or energy into broodlord/infestor/corruptor armies, and not making medivacs for his pushes and losing clumped up armies to more or less 3 fungals, lol, but then i remembered he is terran, so that shouldn't be mentioned.
I'm not going to get into a flaming argument with somebody who has to mimic my response in order to provide an argument...
It's not a flaming argument, you made a dumb post that was more or less "Zerg players are bad, so one should not be surprised when they lose", You didn't have a argument, you were whining. I just responded with the same, do you see how stupid and pointless that kind of shit is?
Once again: I'm not going to get into a flaming argument. Have a nice day.
Dude, you can't just bait a 'flaming argument' like that and then condescendingly refuse to participate in said argument when someone actually takes the bait. It doesn't make you the better person - it just makes you an asshole.
On September 01 2012 14:30 Cranium wrote: The problem with the balance of the game is that every race has a viable T1 versatile unit except Zerg.
100% mass marine is decent against everything.
100% mass stalker is decent against everything.
If Zerg made anything other than 4+ queens, they wouldn't be able to deal with Hellion Banshee.
There is no way for Zerg to experiment with builds and come up with something that deals with Terran because Zerg cannot reliably beat Terran with early aggression.
For SC2 to exist as a competitive activity, you cannot make early aggression unbeatable or a coinflip.
If you want to revert the changes, give overlords a skill that gives them 2x movespeed for 10 seconds.
Do you even remember TvZ before patch? It was 10x times better to play/watch. Now it's MOSTLY passive play for the first ~10-12 minutes. Queens up, spread creep. Terrans for hellions deny some shit and go for 3rd.
Before patch it was madness, constant agression from both sides(Zerg was more on defensive and it was quite tough, yes..not imbalanced). The only reason I hate the queen patch is because it changed the whole gameplay, it made turtling so much better and viable for zerg.. and now for T as well.
TvZ was so freaking awesome, it's still good but it won't be DRG vs MMA lvl anytime soon -,-
not really. Pre-patch, zerg either goes for roach baneling bust (see DRG vs MMA game again) to stop terran being so greedy: reactor hellion + quick 3rd CC.
now it kinds of go back to standard zerg gets a faster 3rd to adjust to the fact that the T has went for a quick CC or even a quick 3rd CC.
Now the TvZ has special way to deal with the quick CC, bunker hellion marine. Not that different from before actually as you watch more games
Why do people say that Mvp and Taeja know how to play TvZ? They just found a way to circumvent the problem by turteling hardcore. Is that really a fix? It would be a better game if terran had the ability to punish greedy thirds without going allin and if terran had something to slowly transition and not do a 180° turn like going mass starport after marine tank.
On September 01 2012 18:15 graNite wrote: Why do people say that Mvp and Taeja know how to play TvZ? They just found a way to circumvent the problem by turteling hardcore. Is that really a fix? It would be a better game if terran had the ability to punish greedy thirds without going allin and if terran had something to slowly transition and not do a 180° turn like going mass starport after marine tank.
Yes, they way they play is a fix, as it obviously works and also worked before the patch. MVP has been playing very defensive styles for 2years now. And no they aren't even turtling hardcore. They use banshees and hellions and drops to put on pressure and move out halfway on the map to put on pressure.
And yes, it would be nice if the game had more smooth transitions. Blizzard missed that chance long time ago, when they nerfed roaches and hydras down, so they turned out to become midgame exclusive (if even that) units and afterwards balanced the game around the resulting dynamics.
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
... studies conclude: 90% of terrans cannot read!
Honestly, blizzard said from the very beginning, that these changes are about the highest level of play only! If you guys loose in tvz, its just because you suck, l2p!
Really, what an outrage that blizzard is looking only at the highest level of play, when they want to know if the changes they plan to balance the highest level of play are really necessary!
Indeed, they are looking at the highest level of play! TvZ at the highest level of play was perfectly balanced. Then blizzard BUFFED THE QUEEN. Hi.
On September 01 2012 01:07 ELA wrote: Well, TaeJa and MVP sure did screw that up for the rest of us :D
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
... studies conclude: 90% of terrans cannot read!
Honestly, blizzard said from the very beginning, that these changes are about the highest level of play only! If you guys loose in tvz, its just because you suck, l2p!
Really, what an outrage that blizzard is looking only at the highest level of play, when they want to know if the changes they plan to balance the highest level of play are really necessary!
Indeed, they are looking at the highest level of play! TvZ at the highest level of play was perfectly balanced. Then blizzard BUFFED THE QUEEN. Hi.
i like how terrans say it was perfectly balanced before the patch.
as you can see TvZ was ALWAYS T favoured on the highest level and NEVER balanced in 50/50 balanced. so stop telling it was balanced and blizzard messed up. its the other way around! NOW it is about 50/50!
They're driving this game into its coffin. The queen buff seems to be a terrible solution to a the terrible unit design that is the hellion. While too many games ended with hellions slipping by, the solution just made every game boring.
"Oh and he just can't deal with the broodlords" or "LOOK AT THOSE THREE SEEKER MISSILES KILLING FIFTEEN BROODLORDS!!!"
If anything I'm expecting a damage cap to a single SM or an automated split mechanism exclusively for zerg air units so zerg can stick to macroing and a-move their units.
On September 01 2012 01:07 ELA wrote: Well, TaeJa and MVP sure did screw that up for the rest of us :D
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
... studies conclude: 90% of terrans cannot read!
Honestly, blizzard said from the very beginning, that these changes are about the highest level of play only! If you guys loose in tvz, its just because you suck, l2p!
Really, what an outrage that blizzard is looking only at the highest level of play, when they want to know if the changes they plan to balance the highest level of play are really necessary!
Indeed, they are looking at the highest level of play! TvZ at the highest level of play was perfectly balanced. Then blizzard BUFFED THE QUEEN. Hi.
i like how terrans say it was perfectly balanced before the patch.
as you can see TvZ was ALWAYS T favoured on the highest level and NEVER balanced in 50/50 balanced. so stop telling it was balanced and blizzard messed up. its the other way around! NOW it is about 50/50!
Did you even look at the charts? Z>T (for the first time?) two months before the queen patch. Then the queenpatch destroyed the Terran metagame for one month. Then the matchup became perfectly balanced two months ago (on Korean prolevel).
The queen patch was probably unnecessary to begin with, the outcome of the queen patch however just shows how much more blizzard understands of balancing this game than anyone else.
On September 01 2012 01:07 ELA wrote: Well, TaeJa and MVP sure did screw that up for the rest of us :D
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
... studies conclude: 90% of terrans cannot read!
Honestly, blizzard said from the very beginning, that these changes are about the highest level of play only! If you guys loose in tvz, its just because you suck, l2p!
Really, what an outrage that blizzard is looking only at the highest level of play, when they want to know if the changes they plan to balance the highest level of play are really necessary!
Indeed, they are looking at the highest level of play! TvZ at the highest level of play was perfectly balanced. Then blizzard BUFFED THE QUEEN. Hi.
i like how terrans say it was perfectly balanced before the patch.
as you can see TvZ was ALWAYS T favoured on the highest level and NEVER balanced in 50/50 balanced. so stop telling it was balanced and blizzard messed up. its the other way around! NOW it is about 50/50!
Did you even look at the charts? Z>T (for the first time?) two months before the queen patch. Then the queenpatch destroyed the Terran metagame for one month. Then the matchup became perfectly balanced two months ago (on Korean prolevel).
The queen patch was probably unnecessary to begin with, the outcome of the queen patch however just shows how much more blizzard understands of balancing this game than anyone else.
yes there was one month zerg favoured and next month T favoured again. just saying terrans should stop complaining about the queen patch which was obviously fine (2 months 50/50) since it made zvt more interesting (no more "build 4 helions and camp them in front of zerg base" every game) and made zvz a lot more skillbased instead of partly luckbased ling baneling wars.
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
Is that the only map Blizzard had a look at? No. So how do you come to your conclusion?
So many douchbags only bashing blizzard for the sake of bashing. When they pull ladder statistics those trolls go "ZOMG watch tournys you n00bz0rs!" When they pull tournament games those go "ZOMG you watch a korean dest0rying som random n00bz0r!"
Can they atleast change creep tumours so they cant be canceled? Why should you be able to cancel them? Not only will there be several queens spreading creep all over the map, but IF the other player tries to deny it, then you dont even have to send out units and defend it. Just cancel and get another chance to spread that tumour. Why is that? Why cant there be a prize to pay once you decide to spread the tumour without looking whats enemy units are close?
On September 01 2012 13:22 blug wrote: I'm a zerg player I'll admit it.
I actually agree with the balance team for once. I think that terran does need more time to come up with more strats because I have been seeing so much success with heavy blue flame hellion play into mech (That isn't that APM intensive mind you).
Yeah dude that build isnt apm intensive? harassing with with hellions, banshees and taking care of all the macro, buidlings etc is quite apm intesive. Try killing 30 drones with harass, have 4-5 cc, and close to maxed out mech army at 15 min like Mvp. And do it with low apm
Been saying it ever since the start. Terrans just needed to learn the new metagame, and it would be fine. But I guess that people just enjoy complaining.
Have Ravens been used effectively on maps other them Metropolis?
I wish Blizzard had this "wait and see" atitude since the begining. There have been so many changes based on a few days or weeks of play (hellion, thor, ghost...and so many during beta)
Can't wait for HOTS and hopefuly better balance decisions.
Team Liquid would profit a lot if they run mandatory ads for opening these balance related threads. No other topic in the community attracts this many viewership/posts.
A thorough [G] strategy guide thread? 50,000 viewers over the course of maybe several weeks. A balance related thread? BOOM 50,000 viewers in less than a day.
Having controversial balance issues in the community actually benefits Team Liquid. If I were to run Team Liquid, I would ask my mods not to warn/ban too many so that viewership goes up by having controversial posts that attract tons of counterargument posts.
The more you guys discuss, the more laughter I can hear from Team Liquid.
On September 01 2012 20:44 Orek wrote: Team Liquid would profit a lot if they run mandatory ads for opening these balance related threads. No other topic in the community attracts this many viewership/posts.
A thorough [G] strategy guide thread? 50,000 viewers over the course of maybe several weeks. A balance related thread? BOOM 50,000 viewers in less than a day.
Having controversial balance issues in the community actually benefits Team Liquid. If I were to run Team Liquid, I would ask my mods not to warn/ban too many so that viewership goes up by having controversial posts that attract tons of counterargument posts.
The more you guys discuss, the more laughter I can hear from Team Liquid.
Yeah, they even get ppl like you to open this thread, even though you are only here to write random, irrelevant stuff and not actually giving a shit about the topic.
On September 01 2012 20:44 Orek wrote: Team Liquid would profit a lot if they run mandatory ads for opening these balance related threads. No other topic in the community attracts this many viewership/posts.
A thorough [G] strategy guide thread? 50,000 viewers over the course of maybe several weeks. A balance related thread? BOOM 50,000 viewers in less than a day.
Having controversial balance issues in the community actually benefits Team Liquid. If I were to run Team Liquid, I would ask my mods not to warn/ban too many so that viewership goes up by having controversial posts that attract tons of counterargument posts.
The more you guys discuss, the more laughter I can hear from Team Liquid.
The reason is because they don't play the game.. They are GSL level game balancing with bronze level skill. Therefore it is pointless to actually execute since they hallucinate GSL level skills.
No guys.. I lose the game because the game is so imbalanced at my bronze - master level.. not because I am bad at the game!
On September 01 2012 14:30 Cranium wrote: The problem with the balance of the game is that every race has a viable T1 versatile unit except Zerg.
100% mass marine is decent against everything.
100% mass stalker is decent against everything.
If Zerg made anything other than 4+ queens, they wouldn't be able to deal with Hellion Banshee.
There is no way for Zerg to experiment with builds and come up with something that deals with Terran because Zerg cannot reliably beat Terran with early aggression.
For SC2 to exist as a competitive activity, you cannot make early aggression unbeatable or a coinflip.
If you want to revert the changes, give overlords a skill that gives them 2x movespeed for 10 seconds.
Do you even remember TvZ before patch? It was 10x times better to play/watch. Now it's MOSTLY passive play for the first ~10-12 minutes. Queens up, spread creep. Terrans for hellions deny some shit and go for 3rd.
Before patch it was madness, constant agression from both sides(Zerg was more on defensive and it was quite tough, yes..not imbalanced). The only reason I hate the queen patch is because it changed the whole gameplay, it made turtling so much better and viable for zerg.. and now for T as well.
TvZ was so freaking awesome, it's still good but it won't be DRG vs MMA lvl anytime soon -,-
not really. Pre-patch, zerg either goes for roach baneling bust (see DRG vs MMA game again) to stop terran being so greedy: reactor hellion + quick 3rd CC.
now it kinds of go back to standard zerg gets a faster 3rd to adjust to the fact that the T has went for a quick CC or even a quick 3rd CC.
Now the TvZ has special way to deal with the quick CC, bunker hellion marine. Not that different from before actually as you watch more games
2rax? gas openings? 2base siege tank pushes?
Yea it's not different at all. The trend did move towards more macro oriented as zerg learned to deal with agressive play from T but there were still so many openings to watch for. Siege tank pushes were literally the most standard thing ever(a battle of positioningµ from terran, and doing a great flank+delaying the push as zerg, classic TvZ thing just like in BW), now you maybe see one at 15 min lol(and it has to do shitton of dmg).
As I've said, I do agree that it got similiar pre-patch as to how it's now, BUT viable BO's suddenly became very luck based/allinish.
On September 01 2012 13:22 blug wrote: I'm a zerg player I'll admit it.
I actually agree with the balance team for once. I think that terran does need more time to come up with more strats because I have been seeing so much success with heavy blue flame hellion play into mech (That isn't that APM intensive mind you).
Yeah dude that build isnt apm intensive? harassing with with hellions, banshees and taking care of all the macro, buidlings etc is quite apm intesive. Try killing 30 drones with harass, have 4-5 cc, and close to maxed out mech army at 15 min like Mvp. And do it with low apm
Think before you speak. He meant that function effect=f(apm) is equivalent to what have other races. More apm is better, but it's not like you need over 200 to make it viable.
i get a laugh out of all the people claiming the game is doomed who have 1000+ posts and play the game more than 10 hours a week every week since March 2010. let's assume they are correct and they never play another game or spend another minute involved with SC2. that's a pretty good deal for $60 isn't it?
the other laugh i get is from those people who claim the game is fundamentally flawed and unfixable unless race "x" is completely redesigned from the ground up. and they have been playing since March 2010.
The difficultly of buffing Terran is about the same as destroying an old Nokia phone. However, nerfing Zerg against Terran takes much less time than that, but since it is favourable for Terran, they are going to have to take a long time.
On September 01 2012 21:18 Cramsy wrote: I like the stance on waiting it out. I just wish they would do that for the other races instead of just going for it with buffs to everyone else.
Yeh if we could go back in time and do everything over again, we would have tanks would still doing 60 damage to everythings. Zergs and toss's should just be more creative in dealing with the insane damage output.
On September 01 2012 21:06 JimmyJRaynor wrote: if the game was doomed from the start why buy it?
The same reason I bought D3, played it for a month and stopped. I expected more.
Is the game balanced for top pros? Probably. Reason: They are doing insanely gimmicky plays that are catching the zergs offguard.
The meta game for TvZ has taken a nosedive where there isn't any standard play anymore, nothing you could call relatively safe while keeping close to zerg on econ. Either you econ cheese the zerg to keep onpar with him in econ or you do an odd timing. This is simply a terrible way that the game is balanced.
Furtheremore it made TvZ an insanely dull MU(from being the most fun, though admittedly it was more fun when mutas were the shit). And lastly it made it so every terran is playing on a razorsedge, while zerg's safe play is to get fast 3 bases(assuming T FE) and be ahead. The korean Ts might be godmode enough to be able to win in that situation, but everyone else is having huge issues.
I guess the queen buff was warranted though, since korean Zs were having so much issues with hellions. Ohh wait... Blizzard balance team should be consistent, if you are going to be balancing for top play only, fine but then the queen buff was totally useless too.
On September 01 2012 21:18 Cramsy wrote: I like the stance on waiting it out. I just wish they would do that for the other races instead of just going for it with buffs to everyone else.
Yeh if we could go back in time and do everything over again, we would have tanks would still doing 60 damage to everythings. Zergs and toss's should just be more creative in dealing with the insane damage output.
Yes. That's what I mean, what a fantastic argument. Your post is about as intelligent as saying "Yeah lets un nerf reapers" Players know what's broken and what isn't. I think some of the recent balance changes haven't been as glaringly obvious as your fantastic example
I bet if DK plays a game with Terran he'll say "OMFG HOW DID I LOSE TO THAT ZERG ARMY...OP ZERGG" I wonder if he even plays the game, or all he does is observe the pros play.
I think it's kind of funny that earlier changes that were made people were saying "Why dont they just wait and see if people figure things out" and now some are mad that they are not changing anything.
I think they are doing the right thing in waiting it out.
that is not to say that i dont think something is a little skewed. but give it a little time and i think they can perhaps apply a different balance change rather thatn a knee-jerk reaction to something thats happenening currently.
On September 01 2012 22:10 cronaldo5909 wrote: I bet if DK plays a game with Terran he'll say "OMFG HOW DID I LOSE TO THAT ZERG ARMY...OP ZERGG" I wonder if he even plays the game, or all he does is observe the pros play.
He does play the game at a pretty high level, I believe. He plays random.
On September 01 2012 22:10 cronaldo5909 wrote: I bet if DK plays a game with Terran he'll say "OMFG HOW DID I LOSE TO THAT ZERG ARMY...OP ZERGG" I wonder if he even plays the game, or all he does is observe the pros play.
you're kidding right? he plays all races, and is pretty good at them too.
Still, the fact that blizzard officially considers the raven as an unit with "potential" is kind of meh. 2 years after the release, this unit never made it past his "has the potentiel to be good" statut, something seems wrong.
most lower level terran fail to understand that terran has best lategame macro (OC's). Newer pro plays indicate, the zerg paradigm to 'overpower' the terran has its limits due to the supply cap. expect a metagame shift to "don't let the terran macro undisturbed". nice example: jaedong vs fantasy in SPL
Can i know their reasoning not to nerf protoss a little because i think they are heavily favored vs terrans. Also their immortal sentry stalker allins are almost undefendable for zergs
lol...why didn't DKim give zerg players more time and opportunity back when the game was most balanced? The metagame was shifting towards mass queen openings even before the patch... 3 Terran Nerfs within 6 week period, and now he gives us 6 months to experiment? Seems logical...
Looking at the groups for the next GSL season there are 13T, 10P and 9Z so the balance talk saying T is underpowered is ridiculous. But I do agree that the creep tumor would not be a bad idea for the proposed early game for Terrans and also the late, late game PvZ where massive creep spread with the strongest comp in the game of BL-infestor, can be pushed forward with spines and spores with far to much ease. Only way to beat it is with the coin flip vortex or bad play from Z. But as I mentioned earlier Zerg is the least represented in the next GSL so maybe mid or early game is where they should focus.
hum .. when watching SPL where the BW pros compete in SC2 now, it seems like the former zerg bonjwas have a significantly lower win-rate in SC2 compared to BW. So it might be another T nerf or Zerg buff incoming (depends on HOTS release date) .. My prediction: Terran still OP, mules will cost supply ;-)
On September 01 2012 23:43 ZeBigMarn wrote: Looking at the groups for the next GSL season there are 13T, 10P and 9Z so the balance talk saying T is underpowered is ridiculous. But I do agree that the creep tumor would not be a bad idea for the proposed early game for Terrans and also the late, late game PvZ where massive creep spread with the strongest comp in the game of BL-infestor, can be pushed forward with spines and spores with far to much ease. Only way to beat it is with the coin flip vortex or bad play from Z. But as I mentioned earlier Zerg is the least represented in the next GSL so maybe mid or early game is where they should focus.
Using code S member numbers to argue balance is as silly as argueing that a single game shows imbalance or that even who won shows it. Its a nice thing to look at but the best thing to look at is a mass amount of games because in them you can pick up on certain patterns that persist.in the games to see what may or may not need looking at.
Note as evidence of this I believe the last BW OSL was about 15(maybe 16) zergs but then they all lost before finals so it was sort of a letdown.
On September 01 2012 23:43 ZeBigMarn wrote: Looking at the groups for the next GSL season there are 13T, 10P and 9Z so the balance talk saying T is underpowered is ridiculous.
GSL or WCS Korea race distribution do not prove anything about balance or imbalance but whatever.
On September 01 2012 23:44 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: hum .. when watching SPL where the BW pros compete in SC2 now, it seems like the former zerg bonjwas have a significantly lower win-rate in SC2 compared to BW. So it might be another T nerf or Zerg buff incoming (depends on HOTS release date) .. My prediction: Terran still OP, mules will cost supply ;-)
Complaining about MULEs when your race can build 15 workers at once, really? But then again what should we expect from Mr. “Just-build-macro-OCs” ...
On September 01 2012 22:43 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: most lower level terran fail to understand that terran has best lategame macro (OC's). Newer pro plays indicate, the zerg paradigm to 'overpower' the terran has its limits due to the supply cap. expect a metagame shift to "don't let the terran macro undisturbed". nice example: jaedong vs fantasy in SPL
Terran has the worst unit macro. Compare baracks to to warp in and larva injected hatcherys.
On September 01 2012 23:43 ZeBigMarn wrote: Looking at the groups for the next GSL season there are 13T, 10P and 9Z so the balance talk saying T is underpowered is ridiculous.
GSL or WCS Korea race distribution do not prove anything about balance or imbalance but whatever.
On September 01 2012 23:44 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: hum .. when watching SPL where the BW pros compete in SC2 now, it seems like the former zerg bonjwas have a significantly lower win-rate in SC2 compared to BW. So it might be another T nerf or Zerg buff incoming (depends on HOTS release date) .. My prediction: Terran still OP, mules will cost supply ;-)
Complaining about MULEs when your race can build 15 workers at once, really? But then again what should we expect from Mr. “Just-build-macro-OCs” ...
You don't build extra rax?
Macro hatches are required for production. Maybe if OCs also produced all your units you'd build more of them too?
Because, you know, macro OCs are totally never done ever. Who wants to replace all their workers on minerals with mules that cost 0 supply and mine far more in the lategame while playing mech anyway?
On September 01 2012 22:43 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: most lower level terran fail to understand that terran has best lategame macro (OC's). Newer pro plays indicate, the zerg paradigm to 'overpower' the terran has its limits due to the supply cap. expect a metagame shift to "don't let the terran macro undisturbed". nice example: jaedong vs fantasy in SPL
Terran has the worst unit macro. Compare baracks to to warp in and larva injected hatcherys.
I'd call this 'production'. terran has the most expensive and inflexible production, that's true. therfore they have a great allround unit: the marine.
The overlord speed increase made complete sense, considering the maps increased in size and it was hard to distinguish a normal helion expand from a 2fact helion all in.
Before the queen buff 8 helions could force a lot of roaches, leaving zerg on 2 bases for a long time. During this period terran could get a third CC up. But the terran could also be researching stim and making marines from two reactored barracks at the same time, going for a very strong all in. It was very hard for zergs to deal with this and DRG was doing great but many others were not. I think the combination of queen range and overlord speed increase was a bit too much though.
What I don't like about TvZ right now is the overall flow of the game. Both players take 3 bases without much going on, they tech up without much going on. There is barely a mid game where decisions are made, where players exchange units and gain or lose ground. Well sometimes players kill some creep tumors. How exciting!. Mid game starts at hive tech. In BW, we had zerglings vs marines. Once medics were added terran could move out on the map. Then mutas came and drove the marines back ( or the marines forced the mutas to stay at home while terran got more defences up ). There was action all over the map during the midgame while every base ( GAS!) that was taken meant new units got into play. Until eventually we could see Science vessel, tank, vulture, goliath versus ultra, defiler, crackling, queen.
Currently we see 3 bases taken within twelve minutes, full tech at 17 minutes ( except hive tech upgrades/armory upgrades ). And that's just dull.
Please keep both terrand and zerg on their toes during the early game so they can't play as greedily as they are playing now. The game has no flow to it. It is hyperexponential growth into lategame.
BTW: Fungal growth stuns units for a millisecond and does damage for infestors who are burrowed and it snares units if it's cast by a burrowed infestor. No smart cast for this one, people have to select their infestors manually.
On September 01 2012 23:43 ZeBigMarn wrote: Looking at the groups for the next GSL season there are 13T, 10P and 9Z so the balance talk saying T is underpowered is ridiculous.
GSL or WCS Korea race distribution do not prove anything about balance or imbalance but whatever.
On September 01 2012 23:44 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: hum .. when watching SPL where the BW pros compete in SC2 now, it seems like the former zerg bonjwas have a significantly lower win-rate in SC2 compared to BW. So it might be another T nerf or Zerg buff incoming (depends on HOTS release date) .. My prediction: Terran still OP, mules will cost supply ;-)
Complaining about MULEs when your race can build 15 workers at once, really? But then again what should we expect from Mr. “Just-build-macro-OCs” ...
I am not a 'Terran hater' or something, and i enjoy ZvT having no complaints. However if you would be able to do the math of mules and watch recent high-level pro play one might get the impression, that 4000 mins income of off mules can counter anything. Anyway .. we'll see, maybe some map changes fix that. Btw: "15 workers at once" do not help regarding the 200 supply cap, going beyong 80, 90 workers for zerg is not an option, so zerg and protoss economy is capped. on the other hand: all this macroing is going overboard currently (15 minute macro no action games are boring to watch), so i appreciate if any race is kind of forced to attack at a point in time ;-)
On September 02 2012 00:25 Tommie wrote: The overlord speed increase made complete sense, considering the maps increased in size and it was hard to distinguish a normal helion expand from a 2fact helion all in.
Before the queen buff 8 helions could force a lot of roaches, leaving zerg on 2 bases for a long time. During this period terran could get a third CC up. But the terran could also be researching stim and making marines from two reactored barracks at the same time, going for a very strong all in. It was very hard for zergs to deal with this and DRG was doing great but many others were not. I think the combination of queen range and overlord speed increase was a bit too much though.
What I don't like about TvZ right now is the overall flow of the game. Both players take 3 bases without much going on, they tech up without much going on. There is barely a mid game where decisions are made, where players exchange units and gain or lose ground. Well sometimes players kill some creep tumors. How exciting!. Mid game starts at hive tech. In BW, we had zerglings vs marines. Once medics were added terran could move out on the map. Then mutas came and drove the marines back ( or the marines forced the mutas to stay at home while terran got more defences up ). There was action all over the map during the midgame while every base ( GAS!) that was taken meant new units got into play. Until eventually we could see Science vessel, tank, vulture, goliath versus ultra, defiler, crackling, queen.
Currently we see 3 bases taken within twelve minutes, full tech at 17 minutes ( except hive tech upgrades/armory upgrades ). And that's just dull.
Please keep both terrand and zerg on their toes during the early game so they can't play as greedily as they are playing now. The game has no flow to it. It is hyperexponential growth into lategame.
BTW: Fungal growth stuns units for a millisecond and does damage for infestors who are burrowed and it snares units if it's cast by a burrowed infestor. No smart cast for this one, people have to select their infestors manually.
Agree on dullnes of CURRENT metagame, however if played correctly, an undisturbed terran can own Zerg lategame due to mule power. I think we'll see more agressive zerg play pretty soon (some good zergs such as leenock, DRG already got that). I think with the recent changes, the match up is much more even: both races have all-in options, both are forced to macro up (no more zerg=victim, terran=agressor). However the map pool with those huge maps may get adjusted to get more active play (some of the newer 2 player maps already produce nice games, its the huge maps with many bases which lead to overly macro oriented games). The terran QQ is mostly because they have to play pretty different now and the transition needs time and many lost games. From my ladder experience I'd say a lot of terrans have adapted or started to adapt.
I don't care what needs to be buffed to make it possible but Broodlord/Infestor needs to be nerfed to the ground its such a boring and stupidly strong combination . It makes games with Zergs involved uninteresting once reached because its so hard to engage .
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
... studies conclude: 90% of terrans cannot read!
Honestly, blizzard said from the very beginning, that these changes are about the highest level of play only! If you guys loose in tvz, its just because you suck, l2p!
Really, what an outrage that blizzard is looking only at the highest level of play, when they want to know if the changes they plan to balance the highest level of play are really necessary!
Highest play being MVP destroying players that are clearly inferior to him and Kas winning ONE series against Nestea, in a series that Nestea should have won but literally just threw away (it's by far his WEAKEST match-up anyways).
On September 02 2012 01:28 etofok wrote: Finally Terrans has adapted and TvZ evolved from the best to absolutely uninteresting match-up
Yeah. I don't mind losing some games because of some nerf to my race (even though I don't understand the reasons) but all this stuff leaves the sad feeling that the game became less interesting, more dull.
we’re no longer seeing the same balance shifts that caused us to propose changes in the first place.
I can understand the... "IEM logic" for stopping a raven change, but what sort of shift is it that influenced a decision for change in creep radius in the first place?
The way I see it, having 60-80% of the map covered in creep is still ridiculous and makes every match-up dull and homogeneous. How does increased lategame raven use change this fact that zerg will have almost complete map vision through the midgame?
On September 02 2012 01:28 etofok wrote: Finally Terrans has adapted and TvZ evolved from the best to absolutely uninteresting match-up
Yeah. I don't mind losing some games because of some nerf to my race (even though I don't understand the reasons) but all this stuff leaves the sad feeling that the game became less interesting, more dull.
Yup, fuck you blizzard. All these people on the forums complaining about the Terran whiners. MOST of us are whining because the games is getting more and more stale with each change.
On September 02 2012 01:28 etofok wrote: Finally Terrans has adapted and TvZ evolved from the best to absolutely uninteresting match-up
Yeah. I don't mind losing some games because of some nerf to my race (even though I don't understand the reasons) but all this stuff leaves the sad feeling that the game became less interesting, more dull.
Yup, fuck you blizzard. All these people on the forums complaining about the Terran whiners. MOST of us are whining because the games is getting more and more stale with each change.
Yephey are basically forcing long macro but without realizing macrogames that don't evolve naturally are completely dull and uninteresting.
On September 02 2012 01:28 etofok wrote: Finally Terrans has adapted and TvZ evolved from the best to absolutely uninteresting match-up
Yeah. I don't mind losing some games because of some nerf to my race (even though I don't understand the reasons) but all this stuff leaves the sad feeling that the game became less interesting, more dull.
Yup, fuck you blizzard. All these people on the forums complaining about the Terran whiners. MOST of us are whining because the games is getting more and more stale with each change.
Yep they are basically forcing long macro but without realizing macrogames that don't evolve naturally are completely dull and uninteresting.
On September 01 2012 01:07 ELA wrote: Well, TaeJa and MVP sure did screw that up for the rest of us :D
On September 01 2012 01:09 Shinespark wrote: Great. Thanks a lot, Mvp, for using a strategy that I'll never have the apm to perform.
... studies conclude: 90% of terrans cannot read!
Honestly, blizzard said from the very beginning, that these changes are about the highest level of play only! If you guys loose in tvz, its just because you suck, l2p!
Really, what an outrage that blizzard is looking only at the highest level of play, when they want to know if the changes they plan to balance the highest level of play are really necessary!
Indeed, they are looking at the highest level of play! TvZ at the highest level of play was perfectly balanced. Then blizzard BUFFED THE QUEEN. Hi.
i like how terrans say it was perfectly balanced before the patch.
as you can see TvZ was ALWAYS T favoured on the highest level and NEVER balanced in 50/50 balanced. so stop telling it was balanced and blizzard messed up. its the other way around! NOW it is about 50/50!
Did you even look at the charts? Z>T (for the first time?) two months before the queen patch. Then the queenpatch destroyed the Terran metagame for one month. Then the matchup became perfectly balanced two months ago (on Korean prolevel).
The queen patch was probably unnecessary to begin with, the outcome of the queen patch however just shows how much more blizzard understands of balancing this game than anyone else.
yes there was one month zerg favoured and next month T favoured again. just saying terrans should stop complaining about the queen patch which was obviously fine (2 months 50/50) since it made zvt more interesting (no more "build 4 helions and camp them in front of zerg base" every game) and made zvz a lot more skillbased instead of partly luckbased ling baneling wars.
blizzard did a good job there like you said.
It is possible that TvZ is balanced right now, even though i do disagree with that, but saying that it makde TvZ more interesting is flat out wrong. Right now TvZ is a very stale match-up. Most of the time it is a snooze fest until both players are maxed. At this point there is two possible out comes of the game. Either the Zerg will clump up their Brood Lords and leave within a second after they are been killed by Seeker Missiles. Sometimes the Zerg will know how to split their Brood Lords and it is game over for Terran.
I found it funny in that one video, im not sure which one it was, i think it was a video from IEM. they asked a lot of questions and got very different answers except for one.
if you could remove one unit which one would it be. EVERYONE (except Nestea) answered Infestors..
i'm a masters random player terran is my strongest race (not because of chance, i practice terran the most) the only way for terran to stay even with zerg right now in my opinion: 1. macro oc's.. not just IMMVP status,, but thorzain when he's streaming status. like a lot of OC's 2. be super aggressive before 10 minutes, but dont lose any units or you die to a counter all in (because youre also taking a quick 3rd, hopefully) 3. 2/2 timing push, you have to kill a base or two at least. its good if you can drop while you do this
i dont even think ravens are good really, while they are strong, think about that it is 200 gas, and that can be 1 and 1/2 siege tanks or two medivacs which is better in the "early game." when it gets to the really late game, then yes ravens i think are a lot better, but in the late game terran also shouldn't attack (mining out) and should just try to split map/make a good composition
i dont agree with not making the raven change. it's a fun, underused unit that a korean terran showed potential with vs multiple opponents he outclassed. mvp isnt going to win the game becuase of ravens.. thats just the type of unit they are. you cant smash them out and 1 base with them, you have to play a very strong macro game to get the infrastructure for them, and then switch at the correcttime. we should reward power-macro plays like that. i hate to make the fanboys angry as well, but nestea is a garbage recently and it esems all that he can do is ridiculously committal bane busts and 20 broodlord amove pushes (just like vs mvp on shakuras, mvp on metroplolis) with no micro whatsoever
all the zergs said "omg ghost imba" while nestea amoved 20 broods into 10 ghosts and a few vikings, cloaked. destiny even said something about him thinking nestea threw the match. now it's nestea amoves into 10 ravens with full energy and same thing happens. come on. can anyone just look at the game and realize "wow he's been getting dropped literally every 30 seconds for 30 minutes now, he finally got a few broods, he's just going to try and end it" and that it has nothing to do with imba, nestea was just dying slowly and had to go for it with what he could field..
All the zerg matchup's are incredibly boring. I even like zvz the most and that says something... Broodlord infestor is boring to play and boring to watch.
The game seems pretty balanced from looking at the numbers. Terran requires a higher mechanical level for army control. I'd love for the other races to have more potential in their army as well.
On September 01 2012 22:10 cronaldo5909 wrote: I bet if DK plays a game with Terran he'll say "OMFG HOW DID I LOSE TO THAT ZERG ARMY...OP ZERGG" I wonder if he even plays the game, or all he does is observe the pros play.
I know at some point in WoL, when his account was public he was in NA GM as random. It perhaps doesn't say that much but I think he knows a lot more than people give him credit for. I'm sure he's much better at the game than 99% of all balance whiners at least.
I dont think that TvZ is that imba, still the Raven could need a slight buff (be it the speedbuff, a Seeker M. cost reduction or the scaling of Auto Turrets with air upgrades). It is the wrong mindset to change something only if its absolutly necessary, because this way you leave out opportunities to improve the game in general.
What I dont understand is, why so many think that this is a boring matchup? Terran can go bio into air on very large maps, standard bio-mech or pure mech. Zerg can go Muta-Bling, Roach Ling Investor, and later on Ultra or Brood. Imo it is the most diverse matchup and far more interesting than say TvP, where T is stuck with pure bio.
On September 01 2012 22:10 cronaldo5909 wrote: I bet if DK plays a game with Terran he'll say "OMFG HOW DID I LOSE TO THAT ZERG ARMY...OP ZERGG" I wonder if he even plays the game, or all he does is observe the pros play.
I know at some point in WoL, when his account was public he was in NA GM as random. It perhaps doesn't say that much but I think he knows a lot more than people give him credit for. I'm sure he's much better at the game than 99% of all balance whiners at least.
On September 02 2012 01:21 s3rp wrote: I don't care what needs to be buffed to make it possible but Broodlord/Infestor needs to be nerfed to the ground its such a boring and stupidly strong combination . It makes games with Zergs involved uninteresting once reached because its so hard to engage .
I always facepalm when I see complaints about BL infestor.
1) BL is one of the slowest functional combat units in the game. There is basically no way for Zerg to move any BL-based army around quickly.
2) BL infestor is one of the most costly unit comps in the entire game. The cheap unit here, infestors cost 150 gas a pop and are completely energy based.
3) BL infestor is basically the only "offensive" Zerg comp. The BL is the only functional Zerg unit with more than 4 range. Other than their 9 range, BL is a fairly mediocre unit in general. When you're complaining about BL, you're complaining about Zerg having any unit with more than 4 range. Sounds pretty unfair to me.
4) BL infestor takes forever to get to. The earliest I have ever made BL infestor in a real game is around the 17 minute mark. That means you have 17 minutes to beat up on Zerg where his best combat unit has 4 range before this "OP" composition comes out. Often much longer, well past the 20 or even 25 minute mark. Really what you're saying is that Zerg tech should stop at T2. Zerg having to wait until the 20 minute mark to attack into a fortified position isn't good enough. Zerg should NEVER be able to attack into a fortified position.
On September 02 2012 01:21 s3rp wrote: I don't care what needs to be buffed to make it possible but Broodlord/Infestor needs to be nerfed to the ground its such a boring and stupidly strong combination . It makes games with Zergs involved uninteresting once reached because its so hard to engage .
I always facepalm when I see complaints about BL infestor.
1) BL is one of the slowest functional combat units in the game. There is basically no way for Zerg to move any BL-based army around quickly.
2) BL infestor is one of the most costly unit comps in the entire game. The cheap unit here, infestors cost 150 gas a pop and are completely energy based.
3) BL infestor is basically the only "offensive" Zerg comp. The BL is the only functional Zerg unit with more than 4 range. Other than their 9 range, BL is a fairly mediocre unit in general. When you're complaining about BL, you're complaining about Zerg having any unit with more than 4 range. Sounds pretty unfair to me.
4) BL infestor takes forever to get to. The earliest I have ever made BL infestor in a real game is around the 17 minute mark. That means you have 17 minutes to beat up on Zerg where his best combat unit has 4 range before this "OP" composition comes out. Often much longer, well past the 20 or even 25 minute mark. Really what you're saying is that Zerg tech should stop at T2. Zerg having to wait until the 20 minute mark to attack into a fortified position isn't good enough. Zerg should NEVER be able to attack into a fortified position.
... Think I'm done...
The problem is that when the game first launched, zerg had by far the worst defense of the 3 races. The queen only had 3 range, maps were smaller, fungal didn't do massive damage, and the zerg could be walled in if he didn't defend his ramp. That meant that the zerg had to commit to both tech and units early in order to just stay alive.
Now, however, with the loooong rush distance, better OL scouting, queen range, infestor dps, and neutral depots, zerg can dronedronedrone and be very, very safe. So it doesn't really matter that broodlords are expensive because of the early economic snowballing. It doesn't matter that broodlord infestor is slow, because you have the bank to set up spine forests.
If you go back to when the game first launched, broodlord infestor wouldn't be anywhere near this mainstream. It's the community's cries for longer macro games that got us to where it's standard for 10 min going by without anything happening, because attacking is so dangerous.
On September 02 2012 01:21 s3rp wrote: I don't care what needs to be buffed to make it possible but Broodlord/Infestor needs to be nerfed to the ground its such a boring and stupidly strong combination . It makes games with Zergs involved uninteresting once reached because its so hard to engage .
I always facepalm when I see complaints about BL infestor.
1) BL is one of the slowest functional combat units in the game. There is basically no way for Zerg to move any BL-based army around quickly.
2) BL infestor is one of the most costly unit comps in the entire game. The cheap unit here, infestors cost 150 gas a pop and are completely energy based.
3) BL infestor is basically the only "offensive" Zerg comp. The BL is the only functional Zerg unit with more than 4 range. Other than their 9 range, BL is a fairly mediocre unit in general. When you're complaining about BL, you're complaining about Zerg having any unit with more than 4 range. Sounds pretty unfair to me.
4) BL infestor takes forever to get to. The earliest I have ever made BL infestor in a real game is around the 17 minute mark. That means you have 17 minutes to beat up on Zerg where his best combat unit has 4 range before this "OP" composition comes out. Often much longer, well past the 20 or even 25 minute mark. Really what you're saying is that Zerg tech should stop at T2. Zerg having to wait until the 20 minute mark to attack into a fortified position isn't good enough. Zerg should NEVER be able to attack into a fortified position.
... Think I'm done...
I don't care about that it makes games uninteresting to play and watch . If the whole freaking game needs to be revamped to change that so be it because the current state of the game is stupid and boring.
This is probably the most retarded thing I have ever seen.... LOL MVP destroying Nerchio(who regrettably, is not one of the best zergs in the world), and suddenly blizzard thinks everything is okay... What bullshit... When zergs had problems, you just gave them a buff without them figuring out shit... zzz
On September 02 2012 01:21 s3rp wrote: I don't care what needs to be buffed to make it possible but Broodlord/Infestor needs to be nerfed to the ground its such a boring and stupidly strong combination . It makes games with Zergs involved uninteresting once reached because its so hard to engage .
I always facepalm when I see complaints about BL infestor.
1) BL is one of the slowest functional combat units in the game. There is basically no way for Zerg to move any BL-based army around quickly.
2) BL infestor is one of the most costly unit comps in the entire game. The cheap unit here, infestors cost 150 gas a pop and are completely energy based.
3) BL infestor is basically the only "offensive" Zerg comp. The BL is the only functional Zerg unit with more than 4 range. Other than their 9 range, BL is a fairly mediocre unit in general. When you're complaining about BL, you're complaining about Zerg having any unit with more than 4 range. Sounds pretty unfair to me.
4) BL infestor takes forever to get to. The earliest I have ever made BL infestor in a real game is around the 17 minute mark. That means you have 17 minutes to beat up on Zerg where his best combat unit has 4 range before this "OP" composition comes out. Often much longer, well past the 20 or even 25 minute mark. Really what you're saying is that Zerg tech should stop at T2. Zerg having to wait until the 20 minute mark to attack into a fortified position isn't good enough. Zerg should NEVER be able to attack into a fortified position.
... Think I'm done...
I would not complaining about Zerg having a good composition; that's just dumb. I complain about the design of it. The composition does not benefit much from skill of usage and negates skill from the opponent. This could be said for units/compositions from other races too.
this is real high level play (SPL), this game is typical for TvZ in SPL, the late terran macro is just not beatable, in the midgame zerg has no real 'game ending' unit against a turtling terran ..
believe it or not .. terran probably is still OP (at top level only) , 33 marines and mules counter everything with pro micro
On September 02 2012 02:40 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: this is real high level play (SPL), this game is typical for TvZ in SPL, the late terran macro is just not beatable, in the midgame zerg has no real 'game ending' unit against a turtling terran ..
On September 02 2012 01:21 s3rp wrote: I don't care what needs to be buffed to make it possible but Broodlord/Infestor needs to be nerfed to the ground its such a boring and stupidly strong combination . It makes games with Zergs involved uninteresting once reached because its so hard to engage .
I always facepalm when I see complaints about BL infestor.
1) BL is one of the slowest functional combat units in the game. There is basically no way for Zerg to move any BL-based army around quickly.
2) BL infestor is one of the most costly unit comps in the entire game. The cheap unit here, infestors cost 150 gas a pop and are completely energy based.
3) BL infestor is basically the only "offensive" Zerg comp. The BL is the only functional Zerg unit with more than 4 range. Other than their 9 range, BL is a fairly mediocre unit in general. When you're complaining about BL, you're complaining about Zerg having any unit with more than 4 range. Sounds pretty unfair to me.
4) BL infestor takes forever to get to. The earliest I have ever made BL infestor in a real game is around the 17 minute mark. That means you have 17 minutes to beat up on Zerg where his best combat unit has 4 range before this "OP" composition comes out. Often much longer, well past the 20 or even 25 minute mark. Really what you're saying is that Zerg tech should stop at T2. Zerg having to wait until the 20 minute mark to attack into a fortified position isn't good enough. Zerg should NEVER be able to attack into a fortified position.
... Think I'm done...
this was probably the most biased post i've read on TL, honestly
1/Thank god the other part of the BL/Infestor composition are a shit ton of Zerglings then, the fastest unit in the game
2/Luckily, the Zerg can easily saturate 3 bases in the current metagame.Furthermore, if you bother to pay attention to pro matches on big macro maps you'll notice that for the most of the time the Zerg is banking insane amounts of money whereas the Terran is starved because he has to constantly invest in production buildings.
3/This doesnt make any sense at all.Its as if the other Zerg units are not suited for offence....
4/I've seen some Zergs successfully rush to Hive tech and get ultras around the 15 minute mark, its doable. The timing itself is still insignificant if you ask me, it really doesnt matter when exactly the Zerg gets his ultimate blob of units, its not like the Terran has any unit to look forward to in the lategame....
And just for the record, the BL is not what its wrecking in the lategame, its the Infestor, especially in ZvT. I've said it before - Terran doesnt need a buff, the Infestor needs a nerf instead
On September 02 2012 02:40 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: this is real high level play (SPL), this game is typical for TvZ in SPL, the late terran macro is just not beatable, in the midgame zerg has no real 'game ending' unit against a turtling terran ..
believe it or not .. terran probably is still OP (at top level only)
If thats what high level play developed into i'm happy i basically stopped watching SC2 because that game is fucking boring.
agree, the map is too large, so any early harrass is pointless. i think the "terrible damage" concept is flawed. If the maps are small, the game is decided too quickly by early harrass. If they are too large, harrass does not pay off and both players turtle to max. We need cheap microable harrass units, which require not lots of commitment from the agressore and on the other hand don't kill a whole eco line within a second.
On September 01 2012 09:53 SmokeMonster wrote: Remember that time when every Terran in the world thought the only way to play Terran was by being cheesy and aggressive?
Remember that time when TvZ was actually fun to watch because of that?
On September 02 2012 02:40 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: this is real high level play (SPL), this game is typical for TvZ in SPL, the late terran macro is just not beatable, in the midgame zerg has no real 'game ending' unit against a turtling terran ..
believe it or not .. terran probably is still OP (at top level only)
If thats what high level play developed into i'm happy i basically stopped watching SC2 because that game is fucking boring.
agree, the map is too large, so any early harrass is pointless. i think the "terrible damage" concept is flawed. If the maps are small, the game is decided too quickly by early harrass. If they are too large, harrass does not pay off and both players turtle to max. We need cheap microable harrass units, which require not lots of commitment from the agressore and on the other hand don't kill a whole eco line within a second.
Agreed thatswhy i hate the Blizzards patch policy , they went from way too fast decided quick games directly to the opposite. Macro games that basically need to happen because any different opening is basically non-existent ( because your so behind ) are boring . There need to be tech/harass openings possible for every race without making you beeing all-in. Especially in the Zerg matchups because they kinda exist in the other matchups.
On September 01 2012 09:53 SmokeMonster wrote: Remember that time when every Terran in the world thought the only way to play Terran was by being cheesy and aggressive?
Remember that time when TvZ was actually fun to watch because of that?
only if you have poor game understanding. basically most games where decided early on (10 drones slaughtered), the players still played it out trying to entertain. Think of idra's GG timing being pretty realistic, not catz
On September 01 2012 09:53 SmokeMonster wrote: Remember that time when every Terran in the world thought the only way to play Terran was by being cheesy and aggressive?
Remember that time when TvZ was actually fun to watch because of that?
only if you have poor game understanding. basically most games where decided early on (10 drones slaughtered), the players still played it out trying to entertain. Think of idra's GG timing being pretty realistic, not catz
But making it completely pointless to open anything but macro and creating 10+ minute no rush games ( or proxy ) everytime was NOT the right way to patch.
On September 02 2012 02:09 wcr.4fun wrote: All the zerg matchup's are incredibly boring. I even like zvz the most and that says something... Broodlord infestor is boring to play and boring to watch.
The game seems pretty balanced from looking at the numbers. Terran requires a higher mechanical level for army control. I'd love for the other races to have more potential in their army as well.
well, BW was so mechanically demanding, that low level play was 90% decided through APM and decision speed of players, regardless of balance/units/race. Balance came into play at top level, with 200+ APM. This way lower level play was not affected by high level balance. this partially holds true for sc2, but to a lesser extent. Ther terran whining imho is an effect of being nerfed from super-OP to balanced/slightly UP in low level play.
On September 01 2012 09:53 SmokeMonster wrote: Remember that time when every Terran in the world thought the only way to play Terran was by being cheesy and aggressive?
Remember that time when TvZ was actually fun to watch because of that?
only if you have poor game understanding. basically most games where decided early on (10 drones slaughtered), the players still played it out trying to entertain. Think of idra's GG timing being pretty realistic, not catz
And now it just depends on whoever can get their ultimate blob of death out faster. I remember when the late-game was sometime past 20 minutes, now its around 13-14 minutes. Practically every matchup except for the mirrors is NR10.
On September 01 2012 09:53 SmokeMonster wrote: Remember that time when every Terran in the world thought the only way to play Terran was by being cheesy and aggressive?
Remember that time when TvZ was actually fun to watch because of that?
only if you have poor game understanding. basically most games where decided early on (10 drones slaughtered), the players still played it out trying to entertain. Think of idra's GG timing being pretty realistic, not catz
facepalm. Did you watch for example MVP vs Nestea on metro ? Fantasy vs Jaedong ? Those games were boring as shit, not because you don't understand it, but because you understand how fucking boring it is for a viewer. Terrans atleast spice it up with drops on lategame.
Edit - Btw, noone here is argueing about how imbalanced terran was with the early map pool and stuff like 5-rax reapers vs 2range roaches. Don't go that further back in time to find awesome games with harass ^^
On September 02 2012 03:03 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
On September 02 2012 02:57 Godwrath wrote:
On September 01 2012 09:53 SmokeMonster wrote: Remember that time when every Terran in the world thought the only way to play Terran was by being cheesy and aggressive?
Remember that time when TvZ was actually fun to watch because of that?
only if you have poor game understanding. basically most games where decided early on (10 drones slaughtered), the players still played it out trying to entertain. Think of idra's GG timing being pretty realistic, not catz
And now it just depends on whoever can get their ultimate blob of death out faster. I remember when the late-game was sometime past 20 minutes, now its around 13-14 minutes. Practically every matchup except for the mirrors is NR10.
Its only the Zerg mu's these days. TvP still has working aggresive openings that aren't cheese . ( well they only work on non-retarded maps really well but they exist and work )
On September 01 2012 09:53 SmokeMonster wrote: Remember that time when every Terran in the world thought the only way to play Terran was by being cheesy and aggressive?
Remember that time when TvZ was actually fun to watch because of that?
only if you have poor game understanding. basically most games where decided early on (10 drones slaughtered), the players still played it out trying to entertain. Think of idra's GG timing being pretty realistic, not catz
Over with just 10 drones slaughtered? I remember when people expect Losira to start by losing a hatch first and still brought great games. Why would it be that sustaining early damage means no entertaining games?
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
I like to think they wouldn't enjoy the community backlash from buffing the raven after MVP convinced the majority of SC2 watchers that Raven can wtfpwn zerg Blrd/infestor in seconds.
I mean, they patch towards the community's whims, right?
I doubt they have anyone on staff that could hit consistent GM on any server... And all of the people who have some semblance of skill were relegated to play testing HOTS.
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
I like to think they wouldn't enjoy the community backlash from buffing the raven after MVP convinced the majority of SC2 watchers that Raven can wtfpwn zerg Blrd/infestor in seconds.
I mean, they patch towards the community's whims, right?
I doubt they have anyone on staff that could hit consistent GM on any server... And all of the people who have some semblance of skill were relegated to play testing HOTS.
On 10 gasses. Doesn't that ring any bell goddammit ?
On September 02 2012 02:40 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: this is real high level play (SPL), this game is typical for TvZ in SPL, the late terran macro is just not beatable, in the midgame zerg has no real 'game ending' unit against a turtling terran ..
believe it or not .. terran probably is still OP (at top level only)
If thats what high level play developed into i'm happy i basically stopped watching SC2 because that game is fucking boring.
Btw I love the a-moving Infestors into death....
It didn't develop into that, but KeSPA players play like that, and that is why I can't wait for few more months so they start to own everybody. Btw, GSL players still play a lot more passive game than what we are seeing here.
On September 02 2012 03:03 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
On September 02 2012 02:57 Godwrath wrote:
On September 01 2012 09:53 SmokeMonster wrote: Remember that time when every Terran in the world thought the only way to play Terran was by being cheesy and aggressive?
Remember that time when TvZ was actually fun to watch because of that?
only if you have poor game understanding. basically most games where decided early on (10 drones slaughtered), the players still played it out trying to entertain. Think of idra's GG timing being pretty realistic, not catz
But making it completely pointless to open anything but macro and creating 10+ minute no rush games ( or proxy ) everytime was NOT the right way to patch.
agree. Well from a Zerg POV the situation has improved, because with the stronger defense (roach buff, queens, diverse nerfs of tech timings of T and P), zerg can do some earlier timings now and be somewhat agressive. WIthout the patches, Zerg play was doomed to defensive macroing while being harrassed. It was not fun. However the current situation is too macro-centric. I think mostly because the units have been adapted AND the maps have been adjusted, so in the result the shift from 'all-in-centric' to 'macro-centric' has been overdone.
On September 02 2012 02:40 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: this is real high level play (SPL), this game is typical for TvZ in SPL, the late terran macro is just not beatable, in the midgame zerg has no real 'game ending' unit against a turtling terran ..
believe it or not .. terran probably is still OP (at top level only) , 33 marines and mules counter everything with pro micro
Okay, I've had enough of your biased, ignorant posts. How does that game in any way show that it was "unbeatable terran lategame turtle macro" that was the reason why fantasy won? All I saw was that with superior multitasking, harassment and micro fantasy was able to dominate jaedong, who essentially played passive unless he decided to throw away a group of zerglings and banelings every minute without even doing any damage with them, and then finally engaging OFF CREEP to lose his entire army. Fantasy was the better player EVERY SINGLE MOMENT OF THAT GAME yet no, it's "unbeatable terran macro". It's those OP marines. You are so ignorant it baffles me why you think you understand so much.
On September 01 2012 09:53 SmokeMonster wrote: Remember that time when every Terran in the world thought the only way to play Terran was by being cheesy and aggressive?
Remember that time when TvZ was actually fun to watch because of that?
only if you have poor game understanding. basically most games where decided early on (10 drones slaughtered), the players still played it out trying to entertain.
Could you please stop with this fallacy? Only Zergs playing terrible would lose to Hellions running in to kill drones. Good building placement, a Spine and some Zerglings at the top of the ramp to prevent Hellions from entering main easily fended off any commitment from the Terran player. At the Terran Help me thread, people would frequently ask if trying to trade those early Hellions for drones was a good idea, and invariably we would reply: no, this relies on the Zerg player being bad, you will lose map control and Zerg will be able to get his third and start creep spread, just keep your Hellions at front until the Zerg player challenges them. So please stop with this “Zergs had no answer to Hellions raids” theme, it's really infuriating to read again and again the same untruth.
On September 01 2012 01:13 DT.Damage wrote: rofl.....thanks taeja thx mvp for being the best players...youre the reasons we get nerfed!
you dont need that to succeed at tvz, there is SO many playstyles viable in that matchup. Only if you consider playing at a top top level it will be an issue.
On September 02 2012 02:40 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: this is real high level play (SPL), this game is typical for TvZ in SPL, the late terran macro is just not beatable, in the midgame zerg has no real 'game ending' unit against a turtling terran ..
believe it or not .. terran probably is still OP (at top level only)
If thats what high level play developed into i'm happy i basically stopped watching SC2 because that game is fucking boring.
Btw I love the a-moving Infestors into death....
It didn't develop into that, but KeSPA players play like that, and that is why I can't wait for few more months so they start to own everybody. Btw, GSL players still play a lot more passive game than what we are seeing here.
Well then enjoy your boring no rush games without me and a good amount of other viewer especially the ones that enjoy aggresive play. I'm a Wc3 guy i hate these type of games and dispise playstyle like this. If you force me to play/watch that everytime god damn time i'll stop playing and watching.
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
.... I mean, they patch towards the community's whims, right? ...
not exactly. they've done patching because of excessive QQ before I think, but I'm quite sure the queen buff was purely because Blizz wanted to see longer games. Its even implied in some interviews - ''we're happy with the patch'', ''its doing exactly what we wanted'', ''everything is peachy'', etc etc
On September 02 2012 03:03 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
On September 02 2012 02:57 Godwrath wrote:
On September 01 2012 09:53 SmokeMonster wrote: Remember that time when every Terran in the world thought the only way to play Terran was by being cheesy and aggressive?
Remember that time when TvZ was actually fun to watch because of that?
only if you have poor game understanding. basically most games where decided early on (10 drones slaughtered), the players still played it out trying to entertain.
Could you please stop with this fallacy? Only Zergs playing terrible would lose to Hellions running in to kill drones. Good building placement, a Spine and some Zerglings at the top of the ramp to prevent Hellions from entering main easily fended off any commitment from the Terran player. At the Terran Help me thread, people would frequently ask if trying to trade those early Hellions for drones was a good idea, and invariably we would reply: no, this relies on the Zerg player being bad, you will lose map control and Zerg will be able to get his third and start creep spread, just keep your Hellions at front until the Zerg player challenges them. So please stop with this “Zergs had no answer to Hellions raids” theme, it's really infuriating to read again and again the same untruth.
Actually, Zergs have always had the answer to hellions: Roaches, and spines. But no, Zergs complained that they were forced to stop drone production to make defensive units. I mean, isn't that the point of a build like reactored hellions? Force at least some defensive units out of zerg?
Has foreigner Terran expectations become so low to the community that qualifying for the playoff in a tourney is like making it to the finals? Throwing around MVP and Kas like they raped the tourney. I have nothing against Kas, I like all Terran users who take on the challenge. Though losing in the first round in the playoffs shouldn't be thrown around like he placed top 2. Yeah he did smash Nestea's head in but he's smashed in Zenio's as well. This is sc2 not bw, let's not go overboard.
On September 02 2012 03:28 Instigata wrote: Has foreigner Terran expectations become so low to the community that qualifying for the playoff in a tourney is like making it to the finals? Throwing around MVP and Kas like they raped the tourney. I have nothing against Kas, I like all Terran users who take on the challenge. Though losing in the first round in the playoffs shouldn't be thrown around like he placed top 2. Yeah he did smash Nestea's head in but he's smashed in Zenio's as well. This is sc2 not bw, let's not go overboard.
Especially since i barely see Nestea in the Top15 of Zergs these days if at all. When was the last time Nestea looked like a competent top Zerg ? I honestly can't remember it.
On September 02 2012 03:03 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
On September 02 2012 02:57 Godwrath wrote:
On September 01 2012 09:53 SmokeMonster wrote: Remember that time when every Terran in the world thought the only way to play Terran was by being cheesy and aggressive?
Remember that time when TvZ was actually fun to watch because of that?
only if you have poor game understanding. basically most games where decided early on (10 drones slaughtered), the players still played it out trying to entertain.
Could you please stop with this fallacy? Only Zergs playing terrible would lose to Hellions running in to kill drones. Good building placement, a Spine and some Zerglings at the top of the ramp to prevent Hellions from entering main easily fended off any commitment from the Terran player. At the Terran Help me thread, people would frequently ask if trying to trade those early Hellions for drones was a good idea, and invariably we would reply: no, this relies on the Zerg player being bad, you will lose map control and Zerg will be able to get his third and start creep spread, just keep your Hellions at front until the Zerg player challenges them. So please stop with this “Zergs had no answer to Hellions raids” theme, it's really infuriating to read again and again the same untruth.
Actually, Zergs have always had the answer to hellions: Roaches, and spines. But no, Zergs complained that they were forced to stop drone production to make defensive units. I mean, isn't that the point of a build like reactored hellions? Force at least some defensive units out of zerg?
Yeah, it's really mind-boggling. I remember Nerchio playing defensive Roaches to get an earlier third for months, blade5555 had made a guide about this kind of play, but no, better give a race with such an exponential rate of economic growth a way to deny any non heavily committed pressure by using a minerals-only larva-free unit... Where was the “let players sort out the counters” policy back then, I wonder?
I'm finding some really surprisingly ignorant comments in here from TL users. I haven't been on this site in a while but I was expecting something much more positive.
The good thing is that we know Blizzard is looking at the balance of the game logically. It makes a lot more sense to allow the meta-game play itself out to it's potential before making balance patches. Zergs were underpowered for a very long time before the infestor buff, and as we all saw, that took it much too far. The same thing can be said for the Queen buff, which is the cause of this in the first place.
Let Blizzard learn their lessons. If they hadn't allowed SC:BWs final balance patch to play itself out, and had instead jumped at balance immediately, BW would not be the game that it is. The perfect balance of a game is a marathon, not a sprint. If we indeed want to create a perfectly balanced game, then we must deal with imbalance. There has been times throughout SC:BW where races went months without any serious wins. It takes players like SaviOr to come and change things.
Maybe the Korean Terrans are on to something with the Raven.
On September 02 2012 03:41 zakmaa wrote: The good thing is that we know Blizzard is looking at the balance of the game logically. It makes a lot more sense to allow the meta-game play itself out to it's potential before making balance patches. Zergs were underpowered for a very long time before the infestor buff, and as we all saw, that took it much too far. The same thing can be said for the Queen buff, which is the cause of this in the first place.
What makes you say that Zerg was “underpowered” just before the Queen buff?
On September 02 2012 03:41 zakmaa wrote: I'm finding some really surprisingly ignorant comments in here from TL users. I haven't been on this site in a while but I was expecting something much more positive.
The good thing is that we know Blizzard is looking at the balance of the game logically. It makes a lot more sense to allow the meta-game play itself out to it's potential before making balance patches. Zergs were underpowered for a very long time before the infestor buff, and as we all saw, that took it much too far. The same thing can be said for the Queen buff, which is the cause of this in the first place.
Let Blizzard learn their lessons. If they hadn't allowed SC:BWs final balance patch to play itself out, and had instead jumped at balance immediately, BW would not be the game that it is. The perfect balance of a game is a marathon, not a sprint. If we indeed want to create a perfectly balanced game, then we must deal with imbalance. There has been times throughout SC:BW where races went months without any serious wins. It takes players like SaviOr to come and change things.
Maybe the Korean Terrans are on to something with the Raven.
If they only waited with other changes for this long . We saw a build at one tournament dominate and immidiatly its gets nerfed to the ground ( and units become useless as a result ) and now suddenly they stop because of Terran only kinda get owned and not as hard as before anymore and at times even win again ?
Hell even if its balanced i hate how they balance the game and the direction they push it into. They push towards turtle and snooze fests with a-moving armies.
On September 02 2012 03:41 zakmaa wrote: I'm finding some really surprisingly ignorant comments in here from TL users. I haven't been on this site in a while but I was expecting something much more positive.
The good thing is that we know Blizzard is looking at the balance of the game logically. It makes a lot more sense to allow the meta-game play itself out to it's potential before making balance patches. Zergs were underpowered for a very long time before the infestor buff, and as we all saw, that took it much too far. The same thing can be said for the Queen buff, which is the cause of this in the first place.
Let Blizzard learn their lessons. If they hadn't allowed SC:BWs final balance patch to play itself out, and had instead jumped at balance immediately, BW would not be the game that it is. The perfect balance of a game is a marathon, not a sprint. If we indeed want to create a perfectly balanced game, then we must deal with imbalance. There has been times throughout SC:BW where races went months without any serious wins. It takes players like SaviOr to come and change things.
Maybe the Korean Terrans are on to something with the Raven.
But then why make the Queen change? All we're asking for is for Blizz to revert a change that they did before, to let that previous metagame play itself out.
I think main reason Ts would like a buff is because they have weaker late game compare to zerg or protoss.
Zerg is teching to infestors+BLs.
Protoss is teching to Collossus+HT with storm.
Terran is trying to counter opponents army with low tier units + vikings/ghosts. Going for BCs / ravens / thors is far less rewarding compare to tech of other races. That's why T is usually staying low-tech. I think that is main problem Blizzard should investigate.
On September 02 2012 03:58 howLiN wrote: Team Liquid should make some system that showed each poster's league in these kind of threads, it would be funny as hell to read through them.
On September 02 2012 03:41 zakmaa wrote: I'm finding some really surprisingly ignorant comments in here from TL users. I haven't been on this site in a while but I was expecting something much more positive.
The good thing is that we know Blizzard is looking at the balance of the game logically. It makes a lot more sense to allow the meta-game play itself out to it's potential before making balance patches. Zergs were underpowered for a very long time before the infestor buff, and as we all saw, that took it much too far. The same thing can be said for the Queen buff, which is the cause of this in the first place.
Let Blizzard learn their lessons. If they hadn't allowed SC:BWs final balance patch to play itself out, and had instead jumped at balance immediately, BW would not be the game that it is. The perfect balance of a game is a marathon, not a sprint. If we indeed want to create a perfectly balanced game, then we must deal with imbalance. There has been times throughout SC:BW where races went months without any serious wins. It takes players like SaviOr to come and change things.
Maybe the Korean Terrans are on to something with the Raven.
But then why make the Queen change? All we're asking for is for Blizz to revert a change that they did before, to let that previous metagame play itself out.
Reverting the queen buff might have the same drastic results putting it in had: huge drops in winrates for zerg. They've finally arrived at this conclusion, lets embrace it and hope their future patches are much more calculated and thought out -- which includes reverting the queen buff.
On September 02 2012 03:03 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
On September 02 2012 02:57 Godwrath wrote:
On September 01 2012 09:53 SmokeMonster wrote: Remember that time when every Terran in the world thought the only way to play Terran was by being cheesy and aggressive?
Remember that time when TvZ was actually fun to watch because of that?
only if you have poor game understanding. basically most games where decided early on (10 drones slaughtered), the players still played it out trying to entertain.
Could you please stop with this fallacy? Only Zergs playing terrible would lose to Hellions running in to kill drones. Good building placement, a Spine and some Zerglings at the top of the ramp to prevent Hellions from entering main easily fended off any commitment from the Terran player. At the Terran Help me thread, people would frequently ask if trying to trade those early Hellions for drones was a good idea, and invariably we would reply: no, this relies on the Zerg player being bad, you will lose map control and Zerg will be able to get his third and start creep spread, just keep your Hellions at front until the Zerg player challenges them. So please stop with this “Zergs had no answer to Hellions raids” theme, it's really infuriating to read again and again the same untruth.
Actually, Zergs have always had the answer to hellions: Roaches, and spines. But no, Zergs complained that they were forced to stop drone production to make defensive units. I mean, isn't that the point of a build like reactored hellions? Force at least some defensive units out of zerg?
No, I don't think it had anything to do with QQ. I remember David Kim and/or DB discussing how they didn't like the control Hellions could exert on a Zerg early on from a design standpoint. I'm pretty sure their intention was to open up the game and give a zerg more freedom to create better games. However, I don't think they had the foresight to predict the consequences. If it was because of QQ I'm sure we'd have seen it reverted, just like the infestor buff was reverted.
I also remember around this time that there was little to no whine in TvZ from either side, not much discussion either. The patch came out of no where and any Zerg grievances that might have existed were miniscule in comparison to the deafening uproar of Terran that followed.
On September 01 2012 01:34 Vete wrote: In my Opinion they do a marketing trick . At the beginning of sc2 terra was in advantage and I guess they want to do that with Zerg. The queen range + Show Spoiler +
I think they will change the position with Terran in Hots ( Zergs dominate).After some months zergs wonder why they only get nerfs and terrans get buff. finally Hots Toss will get a good buff and will dominate ( the same things with this Addon then) ect.
it is most likly crap what I wrote but it could be a possibility to explain the strong buffs for Zerg.
This is exactly what I was starting to wonder, I'm pretty disillusioned with Kotick et al these days...
On September 01 2012 01:34 Vete wrote: In my Opinion they do a marketing trick . At the beginning of sc2 terra was in advantage and I guess they want to do that with Zerg. The queen range + Show Spoiler +
I think they will change the position with Terran in Hots ( Zergs dominate).After some months zergs wonder why they only get nerfs and terrans get buff. finally Hots Toss will get a good buff and will dominate ( the same things with this Addon then) ect.
it is most likly crap what I wrote but it could be a possibility to explain the strong buffs for Zerg.
This is exactly what I was starting to wonder, I'm pretty disillusioned with Kotick et al these days...
If that theory is true, I'd rather expect the viper, swarm host etc. to be OP, which could very well happen. It seems likely that they want the race that is supposed to bring new players to feel strong, but unlikely for them to do that with queens and overlords.
(The weirdest use of spoiler tags I've ever seen btw.)
On September 02 2012 04:22 FrogOfWar wrote: Isn't WoL balance obsolete anyway with HotS coming out?
Wtf are you smoking, players are still playing for money in GSL and all kinds of tournaments.
Yup, but balance changes are not made for tomorrow's matches but for the long term, and I was wondering how much of a long term there is for WoL. Obviously some players would like a buff, but I was talking about Blizzard's decision making in the current situation.
On September 02 2012 02:40 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: this is real high level play (SPL), this game is typical for TvZ in SPL, the late terran macro is just not beatable, in the midgame zerg has no real 'game ending' unit against a turtling terran ..
believe it or not .. terran probably is still OP (at top level only) , 33 marines and mules counter everything with pro micro
Okay, I've had enough of your biased, ignorant posts. How does that game in any way show that it was "unbeatable terran lategame turtle macro" that was the reason why fantasy won? All I saw was that with superior multitasking, harassment and micro fantasy was able to dominate jaedong, who essentially played passive unless he decided to throw away a group of zerglings and banelings every minute without even doing any damage with them, and then finally engaging OFF CREEP to lose his entire army. Fantasy was the better player EVERY SINGLE MOMENT OF THAT GAME yet no, it's "unbeatable terran macro". It's those OP marines. You are so ignorant it baffles me why you think you understand so much.
biased .. maybe, i play zerg. I don't think T is "unbeatable", i think Terran is still slightly OP at the very top level.
I choosed this game, because any early harrass of Fantasy failed to do damage, so both players basically could macro up undisturbed (though JD killed several scv's at 9 and fantasy lost some ressources trying to harrass without doing damage). Fantasy lost his whole army several times, while doing little to no damage with 'multitasking' harass. Fantasy did not do significant damage up to 20'00. He succeed late when jaedong ran out of money+army while Fantasy had a massive army production powered by basically ONE BASE WITH MULES (fantasy had 6 or 7 OC's). Fantasy outmacroed Jaedong. Jaedong did not "throw away" his units .. he HAD to attack, because if the zerg fails to kill Terran >3 bases, he stands no chance economically. Sitting back and only engaging on creep (=defense, not attack) would have lost him for sure. Creep gives defendors advantage, it should not be a requirement for the Zerg to engage (how should a zerg ever be able to attack ever then ?).
For the books: note fantasy is getting 2 extra macro OC's at 14'00, so has 6 OC's at 14'00 on 3 base)
Long story short: Terran loses early SCV's, looses a lot of units trying to harrass with no results, looses his army several times. Finally outmacroes the Zerg muling from one base with 7 OC's. Zerg is forced to all-in, because the longer the game goes, the stronger the mule economy gets.
edit: no doubt the all-in attack of JD was fail, however time is working against zerg late game, and ofc JD could have won, T is by no means 'unbeatable' - just maybe a bit OP, lets wait for the OSL results ..
I like the players who want the game to be balanced around them because they don't have taeja esque micro/macro... As far as I knew, if you weren't as good as the best, you were supposed to practice and get better, rather than ask Blizzard to make the game easier.
Anyway, it seems like a fair enough decision, they aren't saying the changes won't happen, they are just waiting to make sure they are necessary ^^
If Blizzard has decided to go for long macro games as policy then it would be counter to the initial design philosophy behind WoL. DB gave a presentation (30 minutes at least, I think) on the foundation design of WoL (as an E-Sport) where he was pretty clear that he wanted a game which could be over in 5 minutes and could also last for up to 30 minutes or more.
If there has been a conscious decision to do away with the former that would be interesting. I'm not sure it has, because, if so, we would be seeing that in TvP as well and this is not the case. Early game deciding (i.e. before 8 - 10 minutes) aggression is still possible in this MU. If it is not possible in TvZ then it may be the unintended effect of the last Queen and Overlord buff patch. However, the fact that Blizzard has suggested Raven use may mean that they don't think Terran (mistakenly?) has a problem in the early game; only the late game. I don't think we should assume, too easily, that we know what Blizzard was aiming for in their balance patches (or at least this one). Therefore, if the MU is becoming a snooze turtle fest, it may just be the result of both Zerg and Terran exploring their options in the post patch game and, for the moment, playing safe (i.e. passive). In time, the early/mid game may return with new tactics and strategies (from both races). Of course, it may not.
"We feel that at this time, we should give players more opportunities to fully explore the slowly-shifting meta-game before we change the balance of the game."
On September 02 2012 07:40 rbarreira wrote: Not so long ago I posted a comment on youtube saying Taeja should stop playing so well otherwise Terran would get nerfed.
Despite being a (semi) joke, turns out that comment was almost spot-on.
If only blizzard took that approach to zerg pros : /
i am a terran player, i like that we're given more time on our own as players to figure this out, i am sick of all these quick patches within a month or two, there's no time for players to figure things out on their own at all.
What I don't understand is loads of people are complaining about zerg dominance when infact in this current metagame Protoss are the ones winning everything.
It's pretty disheartning to watch majority (maybe it's the vocal majority I dunno) of terrans mentality. No wonder they lose on ladder. If you are convinced you're at a disadvantage at the get go, you've already shot yourself in the foot mentally. You'll never get anywhere at a competive level.
In my eyes the game seems more balanced than it's ever been. I've personally never ever complained, I've just followed the current meta game and I have faith that whatever imbalances that turns up a long the way will sort itself out in the long run. If the terran race truely needs a buff, I have faith it'll get one eventually. But let's see how the pros play it out from here.
btw, David Kim gets too much shit. He's a smart guy.
The problem I have with zerg from the Pro scene and matches that I've watched in tournaments, terrans ALWAYS have to pressure, I mean, you have to kill 10+ drones in of zerg to have a chance, and even than its not a guaranteed win, come and kill 10 scvs for terran in early game and see how far behind he is.
I'm so glad they've decided not to make any changes. I believe the best move at this point (not long before HotS) would be not to change anything. Blizzard has forced so many metagame shifts since release with their tweeks and some of these I wish blizzard would've just waited a little longer to see how they'd play out instead of pulling the trigger and attempting to people please. I'm just thinking back to the BW days where most discrepancies in win rates for certain match-ups were resolved by waiting for innovations from the players than from a forced change. Those magical moments are being somewhat stifled.
On September 02 2012 09:01 JacobShock wrote: It's pretty disheartning to watch majority (maybe it's the vocal majority I dunno) of terrans mentality. No wonder they lose on ladder. If you are convinced you're at a disadvantage at the get go, you've already shot yourself in the foot mentally. You'll never get anywhere at a competive level.
In my eyes the game seems more balanced than it's ever been. I've personally never ever complained, I've just followed the current meta game and I have faith that whatever imbalances that turns up a long the way will sort itself out in the long run. If the terran race truely needs a buff, I have faith it'll get one eventually. But let's see how the pros play it out from here.
btw, David Kim gets too much shit. He's a smart guy.
I think the main issue is, is that the vocal majority of other Terran players (not myself, who is now playing mech) are recreating exactly what it was like with zerg players at the time. People complained at zerg players to evolve and lower level zergs were apparently being stupid as FruitDealer was owning everyone, but back then all zergs were not fruit dealer and right now all Terrans are not Taeja.
I honestly think the best thing to happen is to have Terrans like Flash and Fantasy get good, like really good at the game. Flash with his crazy 13+ hours a day of practice will most likely get a mech style/bio style that'll revolutionize the matchup.
I know I keep mentioning mech, but I'm sure they'll get a bio style to suit them too. I just think mech will eventually become standard against zerg for some reason, or atleast more openly used than it is now (there's only a few TOP level terrans doing it).
On September 02 2012 09:01 JacobShock wrote: It's pretty disheartning to watch majority (maybe it's the vocal majority I dunno) of terrans mentality. No wonder they lose on ladder. If you are convinced you're at a disadvantage at the get go, you've already shot yourself in the foot mentally. You'll never get anywhere at a competive level.
In my eyes the game seems more balanced than it's ever been. I've personally never ever complained, I've just followed the current meta game and I have faith that whatever imbalances that turns up a long the way will sort itself out in the long run. If the terran race truely needs a buff, I have faith it'll get one eventually. But let's see how the pros play it out from here.
btw, David Kim gets too much shit. He's a smart guy.
I think the main issue is, is that the vocal majority of other Terran players (not myself, who is now playing mech) are recreating exactly what it was like with zerg players at the time. People complained at zerg players to evolve and lower level zergs were apparently being stupid as FruitDealer was owning everyone, but back then all zergs were not fruit dealer and right now all Terrans are not Taeja.
I honestly think the best thing to happen is to have Terrans like Flash and Fantasy get good, like really good at the game. Flash with his crazy 13+ hours a day of practice will most likely get a mech style/bio style that'll revolutionize the matchup.
I know I keep mentioning mech, but I'm sure they'll get a bio style to suit them too. I just think mech will eventually become standard against zerg for some reason, or atleast more openly used than it is now (there's only a few TOP level terrans doing it).
In Fantasy I trust IMO.
this is a pretty accurate statement
and saddening because I'm hit at both times >_>
....was a zerg for the first 1-1.5 years of sc2, where complaining as zerg = whiner
and then switched because I felt the game was balanced enough, and cause I felt my multitasking would be better rewarded in terran
turns out more nerfs rolled out for terran and complaining as terran = whiner
Finally, I mean FINALLY Blizzard will leave the game alone for some time and will leave the metagame to evolve by itself. Right now there are no clear imbalances in SC2 and there is no need for patches. Yes, zerg have slight advantage versus terran, but I think that this is metagame thing and have nothing to do with balance.
On September 02 2012 10:07 Pr0wler wrote: Finally, I mean FINALLY Blizzard will leave the game alone for some time and will leave the metagame to evolve by itself. Right now there are no clear imbalances in SC2 and there is no need for patches. Yes, zerg have slight advantage versus terran, but I think that this is metagame thing and have nothing to do with balance.
they should really make up their mind if they want to leave the game alone or leave the meta to evolve.
and then switched because I felt the game was balanced enough, and cause I felt my multitasking would be better rewarded in terran
Lol I knew this was the reason i've been seeing more terrans on ladder over the past few months. Everyone loves to think they have da sikest multitasking.
On topic: I wish they would just nerf the Queen back to where it was before. Zerg were already too much like "1 size fits all" with regards to defending pressure - lings roaches and queens regardless of what type of attack is coming at them. Making the Queen even better than it already was just made them too good at defending early pressure and turned TvZ into the snoozefest it is now.
and then switched because I felt the game was balanced enough, and cause I felt my multitasking would be better rewarded in terran
Lol I knew this was the reason i've been seeing more terrans on ladder over the past few months. Everyone loves to think they have da sikest multitasking.
now I'm random... or rather I have several friend's accounts and playing all the races.
Anyone else feel like Terran is the only race that ever has to "feel it out" like the 1/1/1 etc etc before they "balance" it... I don't mind the balance right now but using that as an excuse for one race but not all three really pisses me off.
On September 02 2012 11:46 NeMeSiS3 wrote: Anyone else feel like Terran is the only race that ever has to "feel it out" like the 1/1/1 etc etc before they "balance" it... I don't mind the balance right now but using that as an excuse for one race but not all three really pisses me off.
The game doesn't look half as broken as it did when the other races waited for a fix. -.- More likely the lot don't understand the game.
On September 02 2012 11:46 NeMeSiS3 wrote: Anyone else feel like Terran is the only race that ever has to "feel it out" like the 1/1/1 etc etc before they "balance" it... I don't mind the balance right now but using that as an excuse for one race but not all three really pisses me off.
The game doesn't look half as broken as it did when the other races waited for a fix. -.- More likely the lot don't understand the game.
What do you mean? ^^ Out of curiosity, your statement kind of threw me off. Which lot?
On September 02 2012 11:46 NeMeSiS3 wrote: Anyone else feel like Terran is the only race that ever has to "feel it out" like the 1/1/1 etc etc before they "balance" it... I don't mind the balance right now but using that as an excuse for one race but not all three really pisses me off.
The game doesn't look half as broken as it did when the other races waited for a fix. -.- More likely the lot don't understand the game.
Did you watch GSTL? It was the most disgusting thing I've ever seen.
Also, last month Zerg had the second highest winrate vs Terran than any race x vs race y in the history of SC2 (which was Zerg again in ZvP in January. Terran overall winrate in July was lower than Zerg in any month of SC2 and there are fewer NA GM Terrans than the lowest of any other race in the history of GM's inception...
On September 02 2012 09:01 JacobShock wrote: It's pretty disheartning to watch majority (maybe it's the vocal majority I dunno) of terrans mentality. No wonder they lose on ladder. If you are convinced you're at a disadvantage at the get go, you've already shot yourself in the foot mentally. You'll never get anywhere at a competive level.
In my eyes the game seems more balanced than it's ever been. I've personally never ever complained, I've just followed the current meta game and I have faith that whatever imbalances that turns up a long the way will sort itself out in the long run. If the terran race truely needs a buff, I have faith it'll get one eventually. But let's see how the pros play it out from here.
btw, David Kim gets too much shit. He's a smart guy.
I don't want to be super competitive at this game. All I want to do is play a couple of times a week with my friends and stay competitive with them. None of them play Terran, and they've all "improved" on the ladder, while I have apparently gotten worse. Most of this is due to maps and the power of the other 2 races lategame.
I know the game isn't supposed to be finely balanced at my skill level, but it's pretty evident that, at best, there are huge imbalances at every level except the tip-top and razor thin balance at the top. At worst, Terran matchups need a boost at all levels. With Blizzard's gungho style with balance changes in the past (thors, ghosts, VRs, etc.), their decision to sit on the sidelines now is baffling and infuriating.
this thread is an abortion. every zerg posting here is just downplaying the HUGE imbalance so they keep their inflated patchzerg winrates, while every terran is begging for a balanced matchup, ie before last patch.
On September 02 2012 09:58 ThePlayer33 wrote: just wondering if all the terrans played mech what would the winrates be?
also is tvz or tvp more skewed in terms of winrates?
much lower.
mech is is extremely situational, and ALOT easier to beat than bio.
Mech is only strong in a straight up, defended/sieged up already engagement that your opponent is ethier forced into or plays right into cause they're impatient/stupid.
On September 02 2012 13:37 fawkz wrote: this thread is an abortion. every zerg posting here is just downplaying the HUGE imbalance so they keep their inflated patchzerg winrates, while every terran is begging for a balanced matchup, ie before last patch.
makes me sad, i used to love blizzard games.
Then you released that you were not very good at SC2 and decided it was Blizzard's fault? Or maybe the patchzergs?
On September 02 2012 13:37 fawkz wrote: this thread is an abortion. every zerg posting here is just downplaying the HUGE imbalance so they keep their inflated patchzerg winrates, while every terran is begging for a balanced matchup, ie before last patch.
makes me sad, i used to love blizzard games.
Then you released that you were not very good at SC2 and decided it was Blizzard's fault? Or maybe the patchzergs?
yes me and every other terran have trouble with shitty zergs lol....even taeja and mvp have said zerg is op..but SURE BRO keep pretending the terrans you beat on ladder are worse than you..and that your zerg is actually good...whatever helps you sleep..
On September 02 2012 13:37 fawkz wrote: this thread is an abortion. every zerg posting here is just downplaying the HUGE imbalance so they keep their inflated patchzerg winrates, while every terran is begging for a balanced matchup, ie before last patch.
makes me sad, i used to love blizzard games.
Then you released that you were not very good at SC2 and decided it was Blizzard's fault? Or maybe the patchzergs?
yes me and every other terran have trouble with shitty zergs lol....even taeja and mvp have said zerg is op..but SURE BRO keep pretending the terrans you beat on ladder are worse than you..and that your zerg is actually good...whatever helps you sleep..
Where did Taeja and MVP say that? I honestly want to know so I can read it for myself.
On September 02 2012 13:37 fawkz wrote: this thread is an abortion. every zerg posting here is just downplaying the HUGE imbalance so they keep their inflated patchzerg winrates, while every terran is begging for a balanced matchup, ie before last patch.
makes me sad, i used to love blizzard games.
Then you released that you were not very good at SC2 and decided it was Blizzard's fault? Or maybe the patchzergs?
yes me and every other terran have trouble with shitty zergs lol....even taeja and mvp have said zerg is op..but SURE BRO keep pretending the terrans you beat on ladder are worse than you..and that your zerg is actually good...whatever helps you sleep..
Where did Taeja and MVP say that? I honestly want to know so I can read it for myself.
both said it in interviews but i dont know which one..the taeja one was very recent, mvp a couple months ago..if you search i KNOW you can find them!
On September 02 2012 13:37 fawkz wrote: this thread is an abortion. every zerg posting here is just downplaying the HUGE imbalance so they keep their inflated patchzerg winrates, while every terran is begging for a balanced matchup, ie before last patch.
makes me sad, i used to love blizzard games.
Then you released that you were not very good at SC2 and decided it was Blizzard's fault? Or maybe the patchzergs?
yes me and every other terran have trouble with shitty zergs lol....even taeja and mvp have said zerg is op..but SURE BRO keep pretending the terrans you beat on ladder are worse than you..and that your zerg is actually good...whatever helps you sleep..
Where did Taeja and MVP say that? I honestly want to know so I can read it for myself.
both said it in interviews but i dont know which one..the taeja one was very recent, mvp a couple months ago..if you search i KNOW you can find them!
On September 02 2012 13:37 fawkz wrote: this thread is an abortion. every zerg posting here is just downplaying the HUGE imbalance so they keep their inflated patchzerg winrates, while every terran is begging for a balanced matchup, ie before last patch.
makes me sad, i used to love blizzard games.
Then you released that you were not very good at SC2 and decided it was Blizzard's fault? Or maybe the patchzergs?
yes me and every other terran have trouble with shitty zergs lol....even taeja and mvp have said zerg is op..but SURE BRO keep pretending the terrans you beat on ladder are worse than you..and that your zerg is actually good...whatever helps you sleep..
Where did Taeja and MVP say that? I honestly want to know so I can read it for myself.
both said it in interviews but i dont know which one..the taeja one was very recent, mvp a couple months ago..if you search i KNOW you can find them!
Taeja was interviewed at MLG and said "There is no hope. Zerg is overpowered and Terran is the worst race."
On September 02 2012 13:37 fawkz wrote: this thread is an abortion. every zerg posting here is just downplaying the HUGE imbalance so they keep their inflated patchzerg winrates, while every terran is begging for a balanced matchup, ie before last patch.
makes me sad, i used to love blizzard games.
Then you released that you were not very good at SC2 and decided it was Blizzard's fault? Or maybe the patchzergs?
yes me and every other terran have trouble with shitty zergs lol....even taeja and mvp have said zerg is op..but SURE BRO keep pretending the terrans you beat on ladder are worse than you..and that your zerg is actually good...whatever helps you sleep..
Where did Taeja and MVP say that? I honestly want to know so I can read it for myself.
both said it in interviews but i dont know which one..the taeja one was very recent, mvp a couple months ago..if you search i KNOW you can find them!
Taeja was interviewed at MLG and said "There is no hope. Zerg is overpowered and Terran is the worst race."
On September 02 2012 13:37 fawkz wrote: this thread is an abortion. every zerg posting here is just downplaying the HUGE imbalance so they keep their inflated patchzerg winrates, while every terran is begging for a balanced matchup, ie before last patch.
makes me sad, i used to love blizzard games.
Then you released that you were not very good at SC2 and decided it was Blizzard's fault? Or maybe the patchzergs?
yes me and every other terran have trouble with shitty zergs lol....even taeja and mvp have said zerg is op..but SURE BRO keep pretending the terrans you beat on ladder are worse than you..and that your zerg is actually good...whatever helps you sleep..
Where did Taeja and MVP say that? I honestly want to know so I can read it for myself.
both said it in interviews but i dont know which one..the taeja one was very recent, mvp a couple months ago..if you search i KNOW you can find them!
lol seems legit.
yes..it does do some searching or you might look like a giant douche like this kid
On September 02 2012 13:37 fawkz wrote: this thread is an abortion. every zerg posting here is just downplaying the HUGE imbalance so they keep their inflated patchzerg winrates, while every terran is begging for a balanced matchup, ie before last patch.
makes me sad, i used to love blizzard games.
Then you released that you were not very good at SC2 and decided it was Blizzard's fault? Or maybe the patchzergs?
yes me and every other terran have trouble with shitty zergs lol....even taeja and mvp have said zerg is op..but SURE BRO keep pretending the terrans you beat on ladder are worse than you..and that your zerg is actually good...whatever helps you sleep..
Where did Taeja and MVP say that? I honestly want to know so I can read it for myself.
both said it in interviews but i dont know which one..the taeja one was very recent, mvp a couple months ago..if you search i KNOW you can find them!
lol seems legit.
yes..it does do some searching or you might look like a giant douche like this kid
Dude chill out, your attacks are just making you look like a giant douche. And if it's really so simple to find, why not find it yourself, since you are the one saying it exists?
On September 02 2012 13:37 fawkz wrote: this thread is an abortion. every zerg posting here is just downplaying the HUGE imbalance so they keep their inflated patchzerg winrates, while every terran is begging for a balanced matchup, ie before last patch.
makes me sad, i used to love blizzard games.
Then you released that you were not very good at SC2 and decided it was Blizzard's fault? Or maybe the patchzergs?
yes me and every other terran have trouble with shitty zergs lol....even taeja and mvp have said zerg is op..but SURE BRO keep pretending the terrans you beat on ladder are worse than you..and that your zerg is actually good...whatever helps you sleep..
Where did Taeja and MVP say that? I honestly want to know so I can read it for myself.
both said it in interviews but i dont know which one..the taeja one was very recent, mvp a couple months ago..if you search i KNOW you can find them!
lol seems legit.
yes..it does do some searching or you might look like a giant douche like this kid
Dude chill out, your attacks are just making you look like a giant douche. And if it's really so simple to find, why not find it yourself, since you are the one saying it exists?
On September 02 2012 13:37 fawkz wrote: this thread is an abortion. every zerg posting here is just downplaying the HUGE imbalance so they keep their inflated patchzerg winrates, while every terran is begging for a balanced matchup, ie before last patch.
makes me sad, i used to love blizzard games.
Then you released that you were not very good at SC2 and decided it was Blizzard's fault? Or maybe the patchzergs?
yes me and every other terran have trouble with shitty zergs lol....even taeja and mvp have said zerg is op..but SURE BRO keep pretending the terrans you beat on ladder are worse than you..and that your zerg is actually good...whatever helps you sleep..
Where did Taeja and MVP say that? I honestly want to know so I can read it for myself.
both said it in interviews but i dont know which one..the taeja one was very recent, mvp a couple months ago..if you search i KNOW you can find them!
lol seems legit.
yes..it does do some searching or you might look like a giant douche like this kid
Dude chill out, your attacks are just making you look like a giant douche. And if it's really so simple to find, why not find it yourself, since you are the one saying it exists?
Honestly just for funsies, Blizzard should do a 'call to action' fortnight inbetween seasons, where the race a player has used on the ladder the most the last 2 months is disabled.
Then see a) what races the players choose (e.g. how much Zergs choose Protoss over Terran) and b) the win rates with the off races.
Just two weeks of an off-season, maybe with some achievements or minor prizes to motivate people to try out something new. Would be a boon to the random players - which could still play random.
On September 02 2012 13:37 fawkz wrote: this thread is an abortion. every zerg posting here is just downplaying the HUGE imbalance so they keep their inflated patchzerg winrates, while every terran is begging for a balanced matchup, ie before last patch.
makes me sad, i used to love blizzard games.
Then you released that you were not very good at SC2 and decided it was Blizzard's fault? Or maybe the patchzergs?
yes me and every other terran have trouble with shitty zergs lol....even taeja and mvp have said zerg is op..but SURE BRO keep pretending the terrans you beat on ladder are worse than you..and that your zerg is actually good...whatever helps you sleep..
Where did Taeja and MVP say that? I honestly want to know so I can read it for myself.
both said it in interviews but i dont know which one..the taeja one was very recent, mvp a couple months ago..if you search i KNOW you can find them!
lol seems legit.
yes..it does do some searching or you might look like a giant douche like this kid
Dude chill out, your attacks are just making you look like a giant douche. And if it's really so simple to find, why not find it yourself, since you are the one saying it exists?
On September 02 2012 13:37 fawkz wrote: this thread is an abortion. every zerg posting here is just downplaying the HUGE imbalance so they keep their inflated patchzerg winrates, while every terran is begging for a balanced matchup, ie before last patch.
makes me sad, i used to love blizzard games.
Then you released that you were not very good at SC2 and decided it was Blizzard's fault? Or maybe the patchzergs?
yes me and every other terran have trouble with shitty zergs lol....even taeja and mvp have said zerg is op..but SURE BRO keep pretending the terrans you beat on ladder are worse than you..and that your zerg is actually good...whatever helps you sleep..
Where did Taeja and MVP say that? I honestly want to know so I can read it for myself.
both said it in interviews but i dont know which one..the taeja one was very recent, mvp a couple months ago..if you search i KNOW you can find them!
lol seems legit.
yes..it does do some searching or you might look like a giant douche like this kid
Dude chill out, your attacks are just making you look like a giant douche. And if it's really so simple to find, why not find it yourself, since you are the one saying it exists?
Because we're not writing papers and turning them in for grades here. Mvp has stated within the last month that Terran is kind of a pushover right now, Taeja has called Terran the weakest race, DRG has claimed ZvT is impossible for him to lose if he doesn't screw the game up, and the list goes on. Am I going to bother digging through TL to source everything? Of course not. That'd take up a bunch of time I don't feel like spending. If you want to tell me I'm lying for no reason, go ahead. It doesn't make you not wrong though.
On September 02 2012 16:46 Thrombozyt wrote: Honestly just for funsies, Blizzard should do a 'call to action' fortnight inbetween seasons, where the race a player has used on the ladder the most the last 2 months is disabled.
Then see a) what races the players choose (e.g. how much Zergs choose Protoss over Terran) and b) the win rates with the off races.
Just two weeks of an off-season, maybe with some achievements or minor prizes to motivate people to try out something new. Would be a boon to the random players - which could still play random.
err .. this would be measuring balance at low level .. but interesting. i'd choose protoss, because i assume there are the most safe noob strats avaiable and the units are pretty durable, so you might get away with micro erros when offracing.
Poll: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
I am Terran and pick Zerg (89)
42%
I am Zerg and pick Terran (31)
15%
I am Terran and pick Protoss (24)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Zerg (24)
11%
I am Zerg and pick Protoss (23)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Terran (22)
10%
213 total votes
Your vote: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
(Vote): I am Zerg and pick Terran (Vote): I am Zerg and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Terran and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Terran and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Terran
ppl just realize that they werent ment to be good at this game and are hitting the edge of their skills. let the kespa pros deal with it first and stop the fucking imba and balance qq. you suck and nobody will take your idea of a balanced game serious...
I can understand their views on this and actually agree to some extent(Though I do think Terran should get a little something)... However, they're being complete hypocrites here. As was mentioned before by many others, the Zerg buffs were very random and unnecessary. Back then the TvZ matchup actually was both very balanced and very exciting.
I don't understand why they change their design philosophies on the fly like this, it makes absolutely no sense to me.
If the issue is top level terrans being good but others struggling alot especially against Zerg, I really feel like they should focus on some ease-of-use changes without affecting the power level at an optimal level of play.
Lol at the zerg picking Terrans... I'm not sure they realize how harder it is to play in TvZ than it is in ZvT... I'd easily bet for a zerg winning the tournament if the zerg were forced to swtich to T and vice versa. If you think it's all about macroing behind with Terran, then please do so. Can't wait for you getting slaughtered by infestors or banes... And later on against ultras. Gogogo !
On September 02 2012 18:00 RaiZ wrote: Lol at the zerg picking Terrans... I'm not sure they realize how harder it is to play in TvZ than it is in ZvT... I'd easily bet for a zerg winning the tournament if the zerg were forced to swtich to T and vice versa. If you think it's all about macroing behind with Terran, then please do so. Can't wait for you getting slaughtered by infestors or banes... And later on against ultras. Gogogo !
Hey it's just like terrans who think all zerg has to do is macro and A move!
We don't think they just macro and A move, thats what they do. Switched to zerg, won 8/10 games against terran just by going roach ling baneling a-move. The games I lost was when the terran went for banshee and I don't have a clue how to build spores or where in the tech tree is hydras.
On September 02 2012 18:09 stfouri wrote: We don't think they just macro and A move, thats what they do. Switched to zerg, won 8/10 games against terran just by going roach ling baneling a-move. The games I lost was when the terran went for banshee and I don't have a clue how to build spores or where in the tech tree is hydras.
True story :E!
If you just A moved fyi your banelings would hit tanks and not hit critical amount of marines liek you want and thus terran will be able to win much easier if the zerg doesn't control his banelings.
Also lings wont' get a good surround. Obviously at low levels this wont' matter much but you will notice the difference between a zerg who just A moves vs a good terran and not win so decicively and a zerg who controls his ling/bane correctly so that banes don't hit tanks and hit say 15 marines at once then say just 2.
Don't worry I played a tvp once where I a moved with stim bio and I won. Does this mean I am right that terran is an A move race? Nope.
Good decision from David Kim, although it will make plenty of people mad, they would be mad at almost anything that doesn't benefit them directly anyway.
I'd have been ok with a nod towards the Raven changes and for just the Creep changes to have been aborted.
There is certainly enough in the Terran arsenal to deal with a lot of Zerg strategies and all this is while the Ghost (the go-to anti psychic unit) is being completely ignored. Even in the face of reckless mass Infestor usage by Zerg players of all skill levels, the Ghost is still ignored.
Time is generally the best balance patch you can get.
On September 02 2012 18:12 avc wrote: Good decision from David Kim, although it will make plenty of people mad, they would be mad at almost anything that doesn't benefit them directly anyway.
I'd have been ok with a nod towards the Raven changes and for just the Creep changes to have been aborted.
There is certainly enough in the Terran arsenal to deal with a lot of Zerg strategies and all this is while the Ghost (the go-to anti psychic unit) is being completely ignored. Even in the face of reckless mass Infestor usage by Zerg players of all skill levels, the Ghost is still ignored.
Time is generally the best balance patch you can get.
How can you not think that creep spread is out of control? Its way to easy and fast to spread and it has huge effects on the game. Terran has to start siege-leapfrogging from outside his base, takes 5 minutes to reach the zerg. 2-3 queens out on the creep along with speedlings and infestors in midgame, its not like you can just send out a few marines get rid of all the creep. It also costs sick amounts of scans. Its not working as intended, im sure.
On September 02 2012 18:09 stfouri wrote: We don't think they just macro and A move, thats what they do. Switched to zerg, won 8/10 games against terran just by going roach ling baneling a-move. The games I lost was when the terran went for banshee and I don't have a clue how to build spores or where in the tech tree is hydras.
True story :E!
If you just A moved fyi your banelings would hit tanks and not hit critical amount of marines liek you want and thus terran will be able to win much easier if the zerg doesn't control his banelings.
Also lings wont' get a good surround. Obviously at low levels this wont' matter much but you will notice the difference between a zerg who just A moves vs a good terran and not win so decicively and a zerg who controls his ling/bane correctly so that banes don't hit tanks and hit say 15 marines at once then say just 2.
Don't worry I played a tvp once where I a moved with stim bio and I won. Does this mean I am right that terran is an A move race? Nope.
I always see you making points very favorable to zergs. Keep it up man.
seriously though, all three requires good understandings in order to do well.
The hypocrisy is the worst part. Teasing with (slight - not even close to the magnitude of queen range AND OL speed) buffs just to withdraw them after months after seeing a "pro" player in ONE tournament not getting that you can actually spread your units. Zergs got huge buffs within a week to "fix" a matchup which was widely conceived as the best one.
Guys, DKim is saying Terran just has to figure out new stuff, just like Zergs did over the course of 2 years, remember how Zergs adapted to Terran stuff like Reapers, 2rax, Hellions, Ghosts, etc.? The reason Zerg is the most played race is because it takes the most skill and learning to adapt. If you're a foreigner, Terran is a great and simple race to play since it's not as complex and mechanically demanding as Zerg; there's so much stuff Zerg has to constantly scout for, they can't just build one unit, not scout at all, or do the same exact build every time and be safe.
On September 02 2012 18:42 kckkryptonite wrote: Guys, DKim is saying Terran just has to figure out new stuff, just like Zergs did over the course of 2 years, remember how Zergs adapted to Terran stuff like Reapers, 2rax, Hellions, Ghosts, etc.? The reason Zerg is the most played race is because it takes the most skill and learning to adapt. If you're a foreigner, Terran is a great and simple race to play since it's not as complex and mechanically demanding as Zerg; there's so much stuff Zerg has to constantly scout for, they can't just build one unit, not scout at all, or do the same exact build every time and be safe.
LOL :D - this has to be sarcasm. EVERYTHING on your list got nerfed.
1. Reapers - np zerg terran has to build a supply depot before barracks 2. 2rax - np zerg terran cant build barracks as quickly anymore 3. hellions - np zerg we just nerf blue flame 4. Ghosts - np zerg we just nerf ghosts to become useless in the matchup
On September 02 2012 18:42 kckkryptonite wrote: Guys, DKim is saying Terran just has to figure out new stuff, just like Zergs did over the course of 2 years, remember how Zergs adapted to Terran stuff like Reapers, 2rax, Hellions, Ghosts, etc.? The reason Zerg is the most played race is because it takes the most skill and learning to adapt. If you're a foreigner, Terran is a great and simple race to play since it's not as complex and mechanically demanding as Zerg; there's so much stuff Zerg has to constantly scout for, they can't just build one unit, not scout at all, or do the same exact build every time and be safe.
On September 02 2012 18:42 kckkryptonite wrote: Guys, DKim is saying Terran just has to figure out new stuff, just like Zergs did over the course of 2 years, remember how Zergs adapted to Terran stuff like Reapers, 2rax, Hellions, Ghosts, etc.? The reason Zerg is the most played race is because it takes the most skill and learning to adapt. If you're a foreigner, Terran is a great and simple race to play since it's not as complex and mechanically demanding as Zerg; there's so much stuff Zerg has to constantly scout for, they can't just build one unit, not scout at all, or do the same exact build every time and be safe.
LOL :D - this has to be sarcasm. EVERYTHING on your list got nerfed.
1. Reapers - np zerg terran has to build a supply depot before barracks 2. 2rax - np zerg terran cant build barracks as quickly anymore 3. hellions - np zerg we just nerf blue flame 4. Ghosts - np zerg we just nerf ghosts to become useless in the matchup
On September 02 2012 18:42 kckkryptonite wrote: Guys, DKim is saying Terran just has to figure out new stuff, just like Zergs did over the course of 2 years, remember how Zergs adapted to Terran stuff like Reapers, 2rax, Hellions, Ghosts, etc.? The reason Zerg is the most played race is because it takes the most skill and learning to adapt. If you're a foreigner, Terran is a great and simple race to play since it's not as complex and mechanically demanding as Zerg; there's so much stuff Zerg has to constantly scout for, they can't just build one unit, not scout at all, or do the same exact build every time and be safe.
I was going to reply to you but my brain pretty much shut down after reading your post, i dont think i will ever recover. My only hope is that you are trolling.
On September 02 2012 18:42 kckkryptonite wrote: Guys, DKim is saying Terran just has to figure out new stuff, just like Zergs did over the course of 2 years, remember how Zergs adapted to Terran stuff like Reapers, 2rax, Hellions, Ghosts, etc.? The reason Zerg is the most played race is because it takes the most skill and learning to adapt. If you're a foreigner, Terran is a great and simple race to play since it's not as complex and mechanically demanding as Zerg; there's so much stuff Zerg has to constantly scout for, they can't just build one unit, not scout at all, or do the same exact build every time and be safe.
zerg didn't adapt to anything...
maps got made bigger bunkers got nerfed barracks times got nerfed build orders were forced to be changed by blizzard zerg units were buffed
not once has zerg "adapted" it's always been blizzard changing the game. we didn't see a point of time where zerg was innovating and changing up their strats, it has always been them doing the same builds and it ethier working or not.
there wasn't a time when zergs were told to "learn how to beat ghosts" in a super-late game scenario when broodlord/infestor came out and terrans were at a loss on how to beat it and the ultra transition. terrans innovated and started using snipe and then blizzard just nerfed it instead of zergs figuring out how to beat it.
there are too many examples of zergs not innovating and just the game being changed. so trying to say terran hasn't innovated when they've innovated more than p/z put together x10 on strategies/unit use without help from blizzard forcing them to use different methods is just plain ignorance.
I think the problem for a lot of people is that this sort of discussion becomes unbearable for anyone except Terran whiners.
It leads to a situation where you guys are mostly talking to yourselves, and to the false notion that people agree with you and that you're right. But really, Kim knows a lot better than you.
On September 01 2012 01:06 KrazyTrumpet wrote: I mean, I guess it's kind of true. Terran players are starting to figure things out again. But the ridiculous ease with which creep is able o be spread and Ravens being sub par, no matter how hard you try to argue against it, needs to be addressed still, IMO
Weren't they adjusting creep by a range of 2? Why not just 1? Creep spread by the high level players is indeed kind of ridiculous now, you can see some guys have visibility of 75% of the map very quickly.
The only gripe I have with this is how Blizzard decided to undo the Thor energy change after Terrans were FINALLY have some good success with the unit in TvP. Rather than 'wait it out' like they say they do now, they instantly undid the change instead of giving Protoss 'time to figure it out'.
That way of balancing is so wrong. What if the 3 best players skillwise are protoss? They are winning everything during a period of time. They would manipulate the overall winrate by alot.
Blizzard would then nerf protoss? Thats just ridiculous
On September 02 2012 19:01 MilesTeg wrote: I think the problem for a lot of people is that this sort of discussion becomes unbearable for anyone except Terran whiners.
It leads to a situation where you guys are mostly talking to yourselves, and to the false notion that people agree with you and that you're right. But really, Kim knows a lot better than you.
The problem is that the sc devs always give terrible answers for what they're trying to convey.
If Kim had said "we feel that terran players are starting to improve and figure out how to combat the recent changes but we're keeping an eye on it. currently we feel the changes that were planned would not fix any potential issues with the matchup so we're going to wait on it and make adjustments from there."
instead he references one of the worlds BEST players taking out vastly inferior players, and nestea who did the equivilant of never splitting your marines in combat and saying banelings are fine (and by that i mean if you never split your marines, banes would be flat out OP), as reasons for ravens never being buffed which is something that just 100% should happen honestly. it makes him sound like they aren't aware of what they're doing at all even though they put in alot of analysis to back up their claims.
but at the end of the day, when DRG was almost unbeatable in TvZ people said `we cant all be like drg`` and when it`s reversed and only 1-2 terrans are able to produce any sort of semi-consistent (but not huge) results then everyone else just needs to l2p.
On September 02 2012 19:01 MilesTeg wrote: I think the problem for a lot of people is that this sort of discussion becomes unbearable for anyone except Terran whiners.
It leads to a situation where you guys are mostly talking to yourselves, and to the false notion that people agree with you and that you're right. But really, Kim knows a lot better than you.
The problem is that the sc devs always give terrible answers for what they're trying to convey.
If Kim had said "we feel that terran players are starting to improve and figure out how to combat the recent changes but we're keeping an eye on it. currently we feel the changes that were planned would not fix any potential issues with the matchup so we're going to wait on it and make adjustments from there."
instead he references one of the worlds BEST players taking out vastly inferior players, and nestea who did the equivilant of never splitting your marines in combat and saying banelings are fine (and by that i mean if you never split your marines, banes would be flat out OP), as reasons for ravens never being buffed which is something that just 100% should happen honestly. it makes him sound like they aren't aware of what they're doing at all even though they put in alot of analysis to back up their claims.
but at the end of the day, when DRG was almost unbeatable in TvZ people said `we cant all be like drg`` and when it`s reversed and only 1-2 terrans are able to produce any sort of semi-consistent (but not huge) results then everyone else just needs to l2p.
terrans have highest winrate in eu GM, so it cannot be that hard. top 10 has 6 terrans .. on the other hand race distribution implicates that terran is harder to play starting at GM. http://sc2ranks.com/stats/league/eu/1/all . but this is EU only, in korea, americas the game looks pretty much perfectly balanced
keep on voting guys (though this thread is probably biased)
Poll: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
I am Terran and pick Zerg (89)
42%
I am Zerg and pick Terran (31)
15%
I am Terran and pick Protoss (24)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Zerg (24)
11%
I am Zerg and pick Protoss (23)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Terran (22)
10%
213 total votes
Your vote: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
(Vote): I am Zerg and pick Terran (Vote): I am Zerg and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Terran and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Terran and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Terran
On September 02 2012 19:25 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: terrans have highest winrate in eu GM, so it cannot be that hard. top 10 has 6 terrans ..
Except that:
1. ForGG and Freakhill are the same person. 2. GM ladder is volatile and doesn't say anything about balance or not. 3. Happy and Kas had between 75 and 80% winrates previous seasons, why do they have ~65% now?
On September 02 2012 19:25 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: terrans have highest winrate in eu GM, so it cannot be that hard. top 10 has 6 terrans ..
Except that:
1. ForGG and Freakhill are the same person. 2. GM ladder is volatile and doesn't say anything about balance or not. 3. Happy and Kas had between 75 and 80% winrates previous seasons, why do they have ~65% now?
i was referring to racial distribution amongst leagues. happy's winrate probably declined, because the game is more balanced now .. wasn't he the guy abusing mass hellion 90% of ZvT ?
On September 02 2012 19:25 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: terrans have highest winrate in eu GM, so it cannot be that hard. top 10 has 6 terrans ..
Except that:
1. ForGG and Freakhill are the same person. 2. GM ladder is volatile and doesn't say anything about balance or not. 3. Happy and Kas had between 75 and 80% winrates previous seasons, why do they have ~65% now?
happy's winrate probably declined, because the game is more balanced now
Or because of Blizzard's unilateral decision, lesser Zergs who would stand little chance against him are now able to compete with him thanks to 12'45 Ultralisk Cavern or Greater Spire becoming standard.
On September 02 2012 19:45 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
On September 02 2012 19:37 TheDwf wrote:
On September 02 2012 19:25 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: terrans have highest winrate in eu GM, so it cannot be that hard. top 10 has 6 terrans ..
Except that:
1. ForGG and Freakhill are the same person. 2. GM ladder is volatile and doesn't say anything about balance or not. 3. Happy and Kas had between 75 and 80% winrates previous seasons, why do they have ~65% now?
happy's winrate probably declined, because the game is more balanced now
Or because of Blizzard's unilateral decision, lesser Zergs who would stand little chance against him are now able to compete with him thanks to 12'45 Ultralisk Cavern or Greater Spire becoming standard.
3. Happy and Kas had between 75 and 80% winrates previous seasons, why do they have ~65% now?
So an 80% winrate was balanced and 65% is not... i can see why nobody gives a shit on whining terrans. Happy ABUSED mass hellions so hard that most of his 80% wins happened before the 10 minute mark, now he cant do that anymore and guess what? His winrate drops accordingly. The more whiny terrans cry about patchzergs the more im sure the real problem is that terrans who where carried by race now play at the level they really belong too
But hey... it doesnt bother me because it doesnt affect me.
3. Happy and Kas had between 75 and 80% winrates previous seasons, why do they have ~65% now?
So an 80% winrate was balanced and 65% is not... i can see why nobody gives a shit on whining terrans. Happy ABUSED mass hellions so hard that most of his 80% wins happened before the 10 minute mark, now he cant do that anymore and guess what? His winrate drops accordingly. The more whiny terrans cry about patchzergs the more im sure the real problem is that terrans who where carried by race now play at the level they really belong too
But hey... it doesnt bother me because it doesnt affect me.
Howwas is it possible to abuse hellions? Making lots of hellions was imba? Damn it, wish i knew that before they buffed queen
The more whiny terrans cry about patchzergs the more im sure the real problem is that terrans who where carried by race now play at the level they really belong too
Strong logic here. 45% more Zergs than Terrans in GM league with similiar general population is normal. Earlier when number of players were similair in GM, Terrrans were carried by their race. Zerg players are just better.
3. Happy and Kas had between 75 and 80% winrates previous seasons, why do they have ~65% now?
So an 80% winrate was balanced and 65% is not... i can see why nobody gives a shit on whining terrans. Happy ABUSED mass hellions so hard that most of his 80% wins happened before the 10 minute mark, now he cant do that anymore and guess what? His winrate drops accordingly. The more whiny terrans cry about patchzergs the more im sure the real problem is that terrans who where carried by race now play at the level they really belong too
But hey... it doesnt bother me because it doesnt affect me.
the problem is if you let zerg alone until min 12 you lost as terran, blizzard forces terran to makes something happen early-mid game but on the other hand shuts down every possible harass (sporecrawler root time/queen buff) and gives zerg the possibility to scout every incoming timing push perfectly with overlords on every corner seeing every fucking unit that leaves the terran base.....so still, terrans have to rely on some kind of allinish play and/or some kind of risky moves like helion runbuys and so on......
once there was a time where a really good player would never try to do a helionrunby because its just some kind of gamble, nowadays you HAVE to do them and hope the best.....what kind of game is it, where all you can do is hope that you opponent fails? And thats exactly the reason why DRG says, as long as the zerg doesn t makes a mistake he wins regardless of how good the terran player plays.
On September 02 2012 20:13 Charon1979 wrote: So an 80% winrate was balanced and 65% is not... i can see why nobody gives a shit on whining terrans. Happy ABUSED mass hellions so hard that most of his 80% wins happened before the 10 minute mark, now he cant do that anymore and guess what? His winrate drops accordingly.
Makes zero sense but whatever. Evolution Chamber/Queen/Spines walls already existed before the patch, so if Happy was really winning Zergs only using “mass Hellions” (what do you refer to anyway? 2 fact Reactor Hellions?) then it was their own damn fault. I remember a Mvp vs DRG game on TDA in which Mvp did try 2x Reactor Hellions, DRG foiled it so easily with a simple wall...
And yes, if someone is as dominant on a given ladder as to win 4 games out of 5, seeing lesser players from a certain race start to win a lot more against him after the patch raises legitimate questions.
On September 02 2012 20:13 Charon1979 wrote: The more whiny terrans cry about patchzergs the more im sure the real problem is that terrans who where carried by race now play at the level they really belong too
Actually it's quite the opposite as proven in recent tournaments with GM European Zergs suddenly able to compete with Code A/S Terrans.
On September 02 2012 19:45 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
On September 02 2012 19:37 TheDwf wrote:
On September 02 2012 19:25 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: terrans have highest winrate in eu GM, so it cannot be that hard. top 10 has 6 terrans ..
Except that:
1. ForGG and Freakhill are the same person. 2. GM ladder is volatile and doesn't say anything about balance or not. 3. Happy and Kas had between 75 and 80% winrates previous seasons, why do they have ~65% now?
happy's winrate probably declined, because the game is more balanced now
Or because of Blizzard's unilateral decision, lesser Zergs who would stand little chance against him are now able to compete with him thanks to 12'45 Ultralisk Cavern or Greater Spire becoming standard.
3. Happy and Kas had between 75 and 80% winrates previous seasons, why do they have ~65% now?
So an 80% winrate was balanced and 65% is not... i can see why nobody gives a shit on whining terrans. Happy ABUSED mass hellions so hard that most of his 80% wins happened before the 10 minute mark, now he cant do that anymore and guess what? His winrate drops accordingly. The more whiny terrans cry about patchzergs the more im sure the real problem is that terrans who where carried by race now play at the level they really belong too
But hey... it doesnt bother me because it doesnt affect me.
Wut? Happy is an awesome player - he and Kas have high win rates on ladder because they both play an ungodly amount of games. Wasn't it just recently that Kas scored 1000 wins in a single season?
I wouldn't mind a few more zerg buffs and toss maybe too, I might stop playing zerg though as its getting a bit to simple to win and feels like playing some sort of tower defense game already. But it is always nice to have a hardmode race. And the harder it is the more people go that complain about it heh. They ruined random though ... dicing zerg is like dicing a free win after you rolled terran a bit too often.
But a bit more serious now, it would be a shame if they leave WoL in the state that it is now (and move on to HotS), every zerg matchup revolves on infestors + infested terrans + fungals to force a fight against an army that didn't cost anything, just to face a wall of defensive buildings that cannot be broken with your weakened army. (though lately people waste their army to keep the wall weak and then break through if the zerg doesn't replenish it enough and it is fairly effective i must say)
Protoss Players:Mabye if we encourage zerg complaints,nobody will realise we are the strongest race right now(in terms of winrates). Found that post on us.battle.net\ EDIT: here it is 2nd post
On September 02 2012 20:12 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
On September 02 2012 20:01 TheDwf wrote:
On September 02 2012 19:45 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
On September 02 2012 19:37 TheDwf wrote:
On September 02 2012 19:25 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: terrans have highest winrate in eu GM, so it cannot be that hard. top 10 has 6 terrans ..
Except that:
1. ForGG and Freakhill are the same person. 2. GM ladder is volatile and doesn't say anything about balance or not. 3. Happy and Kas had between 75 and 80% winrates previous seasons, why do they have ~65% now?
happy's winrate probably declined, because the game is more balanced now
Or because of Blizzard's unilateral decision, lesser Zergs who would stand little chance against him are now able to compete with him thanks to 12'45 Ultralisk Cavern or Greater Spire becoming standard.
On September 02 2012 20:12 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
On September 02 2012 20:01 TheDwf wrote:
On September 02 2012 19:45 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:
On September 02 2012 19:37 TheDwf wrote:
On September 02 2012 19:25 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: terrans have highest winrate in eu GM, so it cannot be that hard. top 10 has 6 terrans ..
Except that:
1. ForGG and Freakhill are the same person. 2. GM ladder is volatile and doesn't say anything about balance or not. 3. Happy and Kas had between 75 and 80% winrates previous seasons, why do they have ~65% now?
happy's winrate probably declined, because the game is more balanced now
Or because of Blizzard's unilateral decision, lesser Zergs who would stand little chance against him are now able to compete with him thanks to 12'45 Ultralisk Cavern or Greater Spire becoming standard.
The range upgrade for queen only helped against abusive contains with four hellions and the zerg could do nothing that was going to be a bang for the buck solution, I assume that the intention were prevent that by having the queen having the same range as hellions. You could go roaches but that wasn't a great solution to the contain issue, and getting more queens didn't help either. Hellion run-by is still possible for terran, but they are not as abusive as before when 6 hellions literaly could destroy with not much the zerg could do about it without playing safe on two base and no go out with queens, which led to stale possibilities for the zerg player.
However they should really revert the bunker requirement for barrack which is just silly, if the terran build rax that early in the map he has to deal insane damage which is proportional to the risk he is taking, if you shut it cold the terran probably lose right there or in the midgame. What could be reverted to is the reaper build time since they now have shorter range than queen they will always take damage, the range upgrade makes it far more easy to micro against reapers. This doesn't really change the very rare bunker-reaper rush which some terran still occasionally do. The highest level of terrans probably never do since it is so luck reliant.
On September 01 2012 20:47 The KY wrote: But David I don't have teh micros!
haha!
i think it would be cool to see ravens zooming around. very funny unit. i do like them as suicide bombers as well though.
I was playing BW again recently and I had forgotten just how powerful infested terrans are. 500 damage and MAD fast -_- Too bad they were basically impossible to get when you're not screwing around with the computer...
On September 02 2012 18:42 kckkryptonite wrote: Guys, DKim is saying Terran just has to figure out new stuff, just like Zergs did over the course of 2 years, remember how Zergs adapted to Terran stuff like Reapers, 2rax, Hellions, Ghosts, etc.? The reason Zerg is the most played race is because it takes the most skill and learning to adapt. If you're a foreigner, Terran is a great and simple race to play since it's not as complex and mechanically demanding as Zerg; there's so much stuff Zerg has to constantly scout for, they can't just build one unit, not scout at all, or do the same exact build every time and be safe.
I'm actually not trying to complain, I don't mind the balance right now (T btw). But I find it funny that every single build/unit you listed was nerfed, and that's how zerg adapted to them.
Reapers, speed after fact -> reapers dead 2 rax, bunker build time and salvage nerf hellions, damage nerf to not 3 shot workers instead of 2 shot ghosts, snipe damage nerf
Again, not trying to complain. I lose because i'm bad, and I know it! Formerly masters, took like a 5 month+ break now diamond and moving back up towards masters.
On September 02 2012 22:15 Elldar wrote: The range upgrade for queen only helped against abusive contains with four hellions and the zerg could do nothing that was going to be a bang for the buck solution, I assume that the intention were prevent that by having the queen having the same range as hellions. You could go roaches but that wasn't a great solution to the contain issue, and getting more queens didn't help either. Hellion run-by is still possible for terran, but they are not as abusive as before when 6 hellions literaly could destroy with not much the zerg could do about it without playing safe on two base and no go out with queens, which led to stale possibilities for the zerg player.
Still hilarious how people think playing fair is so horrible. Newsflash: one-Factory Reactor Hellion contain is cost-effectively broken by making a handful of Roaches. The Factory and 4 Hellions alone are 550/100, and that is discounting the Reactor and the lab-rax failsafe in case of Roach aggression. 4 Roaches and a Warren costs 500/100 and easily drives out the handful of Hellions. So do the math and stop spreading lies please.
On September 02 2012 18:42 kckkryptonite wrote: Guys, DKim is saying Terran just has to figure out new stuff, just like Zergs did over the course of 2 years, remember how Zergs adapted to Terran stuff like Reapers, 2rax, Hellions, Ghosts, etc.? The reason Zerg is the most played race is because it takes the most skill and learning to adapt. If you're a foreigner, Terran is a great and simple race to play since it's not as complex and mechanically demanding as Zerg; there's so much stuff Zerg has to constantly scout for, they can't just build one unit, not scout at all, or do the same exact build every time and be safe.
I'm actually not trying to complain, I don't mind the balance right now (T btw). But I find it funny that every single build/unit you listed was nerfed, and that's how zerg adapted to them.
Reapers, speed after fact -> reapers dead 2 rax, bunker build time and salvage nerf hellions, damage nerf to not 3 shot workers instead of 2 shot ghosts, snipe damage nerf
Again, not trying to complain. I lose because i'm bad, and I know it! Formerly masters, took like a 5 month+ break now diamond and moving back up towards masters.
That kck post is so thick with sarcasm you could cut it with a knife. Upgrade your detectors
On September 02 2012 18:42 kckkryptonite wrote: Guys, DKim is saying Terran just has to figure out new stuff, just like Zergs did over the course of 2 years, remember how Zergs adapted to Terran stuff like Reapers, 2rax, Hellions, Ghosts, etc.? The reason Zerg is the most played race is because it takes the most skill and learning to adapt. If you're a foreigner, Terran is a great and simple race to play since it's not as complex and mechanically demanding as Zerg; there's so much stuff Zerg has to constantly scout for, they can't just build one unit, not scout at all, or do the same exact build every time and be safe.
wtf are you talking? zerg only builds queens nowadays and is safe against everything......what you say is bullshit
and zerg did adapt to terran stuff like reaper 2 rax and ghosts??? Srsly?? Blizz had to nerf this shit cuz zergs where unable to adapt!!!....and now when terra is unable to adapt you come here and say, there is no need of a nerf, terrans should just adapt like you zergs did?? Holy fuck you talk retarded bullshit
On September 02 2012 18:42 kckkryptonite wrote: Guys, DKim is saying Terran just has to figure out new stuff, just like Zergs did over the course of 2 years, remember how Zergs adapted to Terran stuff like Reapers, 2rax, Hellions, Ghosts, etc.? The reason Zerg is the most played race is because it takes the most skill and learning to adapt. If you're a foreigner, Terran is a great and simple race to play since it's not as complex and mechanically demanding as Zerg; there's so much stuff Zerg has to constantly scout for, they can't just build one unit, not scout at all, or do the same exact build every time and be safe.
wtf are you talking? zerg only builds queens nowadays and is safe against everything......what you say is bullshit
and zerg did adapt to terran stuff like reaper 2 rax and ghosts??? Srsly?? Blizz had to nerf this shit cuz zergs where unable to adapt!!!....and now when terra is unable to adapt you come here and say, there is no need of a nerf, terrans should just adapt like you zergs did?? Holy fuck you talk retarded bullshit
On September 02 2012 18:42 kckkryptonite wrote: Guys, DKim is saying Terran just has to figure out new stuff, just like Zergs did over the course of 2 years, remember how Zergs adapted to Terran stuff like Reapers, 2rax, Hellions, Ghosts, etc.? The reason Zerg is the most played race is because it takes the most skill and learning to adapt. If you're a foreigner, Terran is a great and simple race to play since it's not as complex and mechanically demanding as Zerg; there's so much stuff Zerg has to constantly scout for, they can't just build one unit, not scout at all, or do the same exact build every time and be safe.
wtf are you talking? zerg only builds queens nowadays and is safe against everything......what you say is bullshit
and zerg did adapt to terran stuff like reaper 2 rax and ghosts??? Srsly?? Blizz had to nerf this shit cuz zergs where unable to adapt!!!....and now when terra is unable to adapt you come here and say, there is no need of a nerf, terrans should just adapt like you zergs did?? Holy fuck you talk retarded bullshit
On September 02 2012 22:15 Elldar wrote: The range upgrade for queen only helped against abusive contains with four hellions and the zerg could do nothing that was going to be a bang for the buck solution, I assume that the intention were prevent that by having the queen having the same range as hellions. You could go roaches but that wasn't a great solution to the contain issue
Then why did Nerchio and later Stephano often played this way successfully? (Don't know much about Korean Zergs but I'm sure some of them were playing that way too.) And what does “abusive contain” even mean? When Terrans go 1 rax FE, Protoss are able to contain them with Stalkers for a while, should Marines be given +1 range to deal with this “abusive contain”? That would be absurd, but somehow that happened in ZvT with the known consequences: non-committed early agression being easily foiled by Queens on their own, creep covering 75% of the map insanely fast and 11 minuts Hive as the new standard.
On September 02 2012 18:42 kckkryptonite wrote: Guys, DKim is saying Terran just has to figure out new stuff, just like Zergs did over the course of 2 years, remember how Zergs adapted to Terran stuff like Reapers, 2rax, Hellions, Ghosts, etc.? The reason Zerg is the most played race is because it takes the most skill and learning to adapt. If you're a foreigner, Terran is a great and simple race to play since it's not as complex and mechanically demanding as Zerg; there's so much stuff Zerg has to constantly scout for, they can't just build one unit, not scout at all, or do the same exact build every time and be safe.
wtf are you talking? zerg only builds queens nowadays and is safe against everything......what you say is bullshit
and zerg did adapt to terran stuff like reaper 2 rax and ghosts??? Srsly?? Blizz had to nerf this shit cuz zergs where unable to adapt!!!....and now when terra is unable to adapt you come here and say, there is no need of a nerf, terrans should just adapt like you zergs did?? Holy fuck you talk retarded bullshit
You need better sarcasm detector.
yes probably ^^
maybe its because his post made me rage so hard that i didn t even took in consideration that this could be sarcasm ^^
Still hilarious how people think playing fair is so horrible. Newsflash: one-Factory Reactor Hellion contain is cost-effectively broken by making a handful of Roaches. The Factory and 4 Hellions alone are 550/100, and that is discounting the Reactor and the lab-rax failsafe in case of Roach aggression. 4 Roaches and a Warren costs 500/100 and easily drives out the handful of Hellions. So do the math and stop spreading lies please.
and this 4 Roaches did what? Yes, they can kill the Hellions in a direct batte but newsflash:
Hellions are faster and do not need to engage in a direct battle.
Yo use your roaches to secure a 3rd? No problem, I roast your natural because you cant defend and guard the drone to the 3rd. You use your roaches to defend from runbys? Great! So I can still kill tumors and deny your 3rd till I have established mine.
Yes Roaches where used, but It was not Roaches only. It was Roaches, and Spines and Sim City and sometimes even Lings just to defend from 6 Hellions. Your math is flawed. You will use that techlab and that reactor and that factory to produce tank/marine all game long.
On September 02 2012 16:54 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: + Show Spoiler +
On September 02 2012 16:46 Thrombozyt wrote: Honestly just for funsies, Blizzard should do a 'call to action' fortnight inbetween seasons, where the race a player has used on the ladder the most the last 2 months is disabled.
Then see a) what races the players choose (e.g. how much Zergs choose Protoss over Terran) and b) the win rates with the off races.
Just two weeks of an off-season, maybe with some achievements or minor prizes to motivate people to try out something new. Would be a boon to the random players - which could still play random.
err .. this would be measuring balance at low level .. but interesting. i'd choose protoss, because i assume there are the most safe noob strats avaiable and the units are pretty durable, so you might get away with micro erros when offracing.
Poll: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
I am Terran and pick Zerg (89)
42%
I am Zerg and pick Terran (31)
15%
I am Terran and pick Protoss (24)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Zerg (24)
11%
I am Zerg and pick Protoss (23)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Terran (22)
10%
213 total votes
Your vote: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
(Vote): I am Zerg and pick Terran (Vote): I am Zerg and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Terran and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Terran and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Terran
For a single tournament I would pick Protoss because I feel like it is a bit more like Terran and you can get by knowing a few cheesy builds, but if I were to switch to a different race, I would definitely pick Zerg. I still have never gotten into a rhythm to do larva properly and consistently, but I'm sure I could pick that up without too much effort if I just played the game more as Zerg.
Well, as a spectator, I greatly appreciate this stance of "wait and see", as I believe the the greatest ideas come from difficults situations. Since terrans have it hard for once, I expect they will reach the top again very soon.
Moreover, I believe that a game with so many parameters is impossible to balance exactly, so the ony otpion is to balance the metagame. If it balances itself, isn't that fine?
On September 02 2012 18:00 RaiZ wrote: Lol at the zerg picking Terrans... I'm not sure they realize how harder it is to play in TvZ than it is in ZvT... I'd easily bet for a zerg winning the tournament if the zerg were forced to swtich to T and vice versa. If you think it's all about macroing behind with Terran, then please do so. Can't wait for you getting slaughtered by infestors or banes... And later on against ultras. Gogogo !
Hey it's just like terrans who think all zerg has to do is macro and A move!
Hey, as a high Masters T I have always given Zergs the benefit of the doubt, but I started off racing Zerg and I'm beating Master Terrans effortlessly.
Send in overlord scout EXACTLY what he's doing. Clean his push up with lings; counter attack 3rd. Just drone and tech to hive. No possible way for you to get dropped because you have by far best map vision in the game and the good static defense.
And ZvP I just feel sorry for Toss. On maps where they can take a relatively easy third it's a cool matchup, but a lot of the maps are poop.
Demuslim said on stream, confirmed by personal friend on an NA professional team that Blizz has confirmed to the pro-teams that fungal is being nurfed, changed to a slow instead of a stun. I have no official source obviously becasue they haven't officially released anything about it, but soon my brothers just wait and see, also its somewhere on Demu's vods.
Do you guys even realize protoss players kind of tricked the terrans into thinking zerg is the strongest race, right? proof: http://imgur.com/a/dx7pt at least in korea,but international is 52-51 toss up beetween zerg and toss respectively
On September 02 2012 18:00 RaiZ wrote: Lol at the zerg picking Terrans... I'm not sure they realize how harder it is to play in TvZ than it is in ZvT... I'd easily bet for a zerg winning the tournament if the zerg were forced to swtich to T and vice versa. If you think it's all about macroing behind with Terran, then please do so. Can't wait for you getting slaughtered by infestors or banes... And later on against ultras. Gogogo !
Hey it's just like terrans who think all zerg has to do is macro and A move!
Hey, as a high Masters T I have always given Zergs the benefit of the doubt, but I started off racing Zerg and I'm beating Master Terrans effortlessly.
Send in overlord scout EXACTLY what he's doing. Clean his push up with lings; counter attack 3rd. Just drone and tech to hive. No possible way for you to get dropped because you have by far best map vision in the game and the good static defense.
And ZvP I just feel sorry for Toss. On maps where they can take a relatively easy third it's a cool matchup, but a lot of the maps are poop.
Yes, it's obviously because Zerg is OP that you're beating Master Terrans effortlessly.
Not because you already must have sufficiently good mechanics to be a high masters Terran, coupled with already extensive knowledge of the ZvT match up, making you understand more than most exactly when Terran is weak and what holes you can exploit.
Yeah, no possible way for you to get dropped, I wonder how the best Zergs even lose anything to drop since they should always have perfect map vision and static defense everywhere.
On September 02 2012 18:00 RaiZ wrote: Lol at the zerg picking Terrans... I'm not sure they realize how harder it is to play in TvZ than it is in ZvT... I'd easily bet for a zerg winning the tournament if the zerg were forced to swtich to T and vice versa. If you think it's all about macroing behind with Terran, then please do so. Can't wait for you getting slaughtered by infestors or banes... And later on against ultras. Gogogo !
Hey it's just like terrans who think all zerg has to do is macro and A move!
Hey, as a high Masters T I have always given Zergs the benefit of the doubt, but I started off racing Zerg and I'm beating Master Terrans effortlessly.
Send in overlord scout EXACTLY what he's doing. Clean his push up with lings; counter attack 3rd. Just drone and tech to hive. No possible way for you to get dropped because you have by far best map vision in the game and the good static defense.
And ZvP I just feel sorry for Toss. On maps where they can take a relatively easy third it's a cool matchup, but a lot of the maps are poop.
Yes, it's obviously because Zerg is OP that you're beating Master Terrans effortlessly.
Not because you already must have sufficiently good mechanics to be a high masters Terran, coupled with already extensive knowledge of the ZvT match up, making you understand more than most exactly when Terran is weak and what holes you can exploit.
Yeah, no possible way for you to get dropped, I wonder how the best Zergs even lose anything to drop since they should always have perfect map vision and static defense everywhere.
Yes, when you see “the best Zergs” losing countless times their remote expands because they don't bother to make Spines despite floating thousands of minerals; Yes, when you see “the best Zergs” a-moving their whole 120 supply army, BLs included, to deal with a mere 8 Marines drop; Yes, when you see “the best Zergs” not spreading Overlords in air space even if their Terran opponent never made a Viking to clear them; You understand why they lose games to drops. But that does not mean it should happen.
Demuslim said on stream, confirmed by personal friend on an NA professional team that Blizz has confirmed to the pro-teams that fungal is being nurfed, changed to a slow instead of a stun. I have no official source obviously becasue they haven't officially released anything about it, but soon my brothers just wait and see, also its somewhere on Demu's vods.
Still hilarious how people think playing fair is so horrible. Newsflash: one-Factory Reactor Hellion contain is cost-effectively broken by making a handful of Roaches. The Factory and 4 Hellions alone are 550/100, and that is discounting the Reactor and the lab-rax failsafe in case of Roach aggression. 4 Roaches and a Warren costs 500/100 and easily drives out the handful of Hellions. So do the math and stop spreading lies please.
and this 4 Roaches did what? Yes, they can kill the Hellions in a direct batte but newsflash:
Hellions are faster and do not need to engage in a direct battle.
Yo use your roaches to secure a 3rd? No problem, I roast your natural because you cant defend and guard the drone to the 3rd. You use your roaches to defend from runbys? Great! So I can still kill tumors and deny your 3rd till I have established mine.
Yes Roaches where used, but It was not Roaches only. It was Roaches, and Spines and Sim City and sometimes even Lings just to defend from 6 Hellions. Your math is flawed. You will use that techlab and that reactor and that factory to produce tank/marine all game long.
Needing a wall off is not a tragedy. That wall is built of stuff like Evo Chambers that you'll want anyway. It's a bit like complaining T or P needs to build a wall or they just straight die to mass lings, or that T often needs a Bunker in early game PvT because Stalkers are so damn good against Marines in very small numbers. You can wall your nat, shoo the Hellions away with Roaches and mineral walk the Drone through the Queen keeping the wall up. Bang, third established, natural still walled off, Roaches can stay closer to nat when Queen needs to go Inject. Not very hard, nor insanely expensive.
Terran did have an early edge in the old meta (as they damn well should given other factors like everything in a normal lategame), yes, but it was nothing anywhere near what the current meta is. Plus even if the early situation was stale build-wise, it required good control from both - inattention meant Drones roasted or oops, Hellions dead, map control gone, ling-Roach knocking at your door. Not as severe as the Zerg penalty necessarily, but the one thing Reactor Hellion Expand was bad at was getting a good unit count up quick. So that small force at the door was indeed a pain in the ass and could easily delay the Terran third for a long time while the Zerg established his own. If there was a problem with the Reactor Hellion contain it was that a very heavy two-Factory Reactor Hellion pressure and the Marauder-Hellion all-in could be masked as a standard Hellion expand. The Overlord buff should have alleviated this splendidly. The Queen buff was not only thoroughly unnecessary but massive overkill.
Or is the current situation honestly more healthy? The current situation where Zerg is ahead by default and at every stage of the game and can just drone up (4 extra Queens = 4 Roaches cost-wise. Similar combat effctiveness on ground, spreads creep and does antiair duty. You don't need to expend a few larvae or take as early gas and can thus make more Drones for better economy and more Drones). The current situation where Terran needs to go for very heavy pressure to force Zerg to deviate from droning at all or go for ludicrous economic greed if they want to get ahead of the Zerg. That greed is far more unsafe than the Zerg standard build.
On September 02 2012 18:00 RaiZ wrote: Lol at the zerg picking Terrans... I'm not sure they realize how harder it is to play in TvZ than it is in ZvT... I'd easily bet for a zerg winning the tournament if the zerg were forced to swtich to T and vice versa. If you think it's all about macroing behind with Terran, then please do so. Can't wait for you getting slaughtered by infestors or banes... And later on against ultras. Gogogo !
Hey it's just like terrans who think all zerg has to do is macro and A move!
Hey, as a high Masters T I have always given Zergs the benefit of the doubt, but I started off racing Zerg and I'm beating Master Terrans effortlessly.
Send in overlord scout EXACTLY what he's doing. Clean his push up with lings; counter attack 3rd. Just drone and tech to hive. No possible way for you to get dropped because you have by far best map vision in the game and the good static defense.
And ZvP I just feel sorry for Toss. On maps where they can take a relatively easy third it's a cool matchup, but a lot of the maps are poop.
Yes, it's obviously because Zerg is OP that you're beating Master Terrans effortlessly.
Not because you already must have sufficiently good mechanics to be a high masters Terran, coupled with already extensive knowledge of the ZvT match up, making you understand more than most exactly when Terran is weak and what holes you can exploit.
Yeah, no possible way for you to get dropped, I wonder how the best Zergs even lose anything to drop since they should always have perfect map vision and static defense everywhere.
Yes, when you see “the best Zergs” losing countless times their remote expands because they don't bother to make Spines despite floating thousands of minerals; Yes, when you see “the best Zergs” a-moving their whole 120 supply army, BLs included, to deal with a mere 8 Marines drop; Yes, when you see “the best Zergs” not spreading Overlords in air space even if their Terran opponent never made a Viking to clear them; You understand why they lose games to drops. But that does not mean it should happen.
I think a good parallel is Ling runbys in PvZ. Every once in awhile, you'll see a pro accidentally let Lings into his base at the 2 base stage or when they're just taking a third. Obviously, this is pretty much GG for a competent Zerg since it gives a full scout and generally requires the Protoss to pull back his army. Nevertheless, it's a mistake and is punished as such. Nobody is clamouring for nerfing Lings, obviously, but I think the point is that pro players make mistakes like everyone else. I feel like the Terran and Protoss styles of play have always emphasized not dying to things like runbys/drops for such a long time that we've become rather good at building our base and structuring our builds in such a way that it doesn't happen. I feel like the top Zergs have also done this, considering that drop-centric play (a la old style MMA) is no longer viable as a style on its own, and considering that Warp Prisms are now being countered by a lot of lategame Spores and Spines.
But the point, really, is that Zerg players shouldn't be losing to drops. If they do, it's because they made a serious error, not because drops are super powerful.
I guess the real difference is that before the higher levels of play, nobody really does try to out-multitask Zerg players because they don't really have the mechanical ability to do that without letting their macro slip. Conversely, pretty much anyone can take their initial Speedlings and try to do some harassment with them.
MVP is the greatest man to ever live. Zerg players are garbage compare to the best Terrans in the world at the moment. Who's good? Nestea? slumping. Leenock? Up and down. Nerchio? Good as long as he stays outside korea.
It's a pity game balance is decided by the quality of the players instead of the game.
Holy hell, this thread is pathetic. Here's the reasoning of DKim, if any of you actually care and aren't just whipping yourselves up into a balance whine frenzy: 1. We've seen some tentative Raven builds start coming out of MVP, one of the forerunners of Terran strategy. 2. We don't think these specific balance changes are super-critical to keeping Terrans from dropping off the map, seeing as there are still some very strong Terrans in the highest level of play (which is what we're balancing the game for). 3. Depending on how these Raven builds end up shaping out, this patch could either be necessary, not necessary but beneficial, or in an extreme edge case, end up making ZvT nearly unwinnable because Ravens are too strong. 4. Given the above, we're going to sit back for a little and watch MVP do what he does best before deciding whether this patch should go through. It looks like he's on to something, and once he hits a new standard build, it doesn't take long for it to filter down to the rest of the pro scene and the ladder, rebalancing things without us needing to intervene.
On September 03 2012 00:46 Acritter wrote: Holy hell, this thread is pathetic. Here's the reasoning of DKim, if any of you actually care and aren't just whipping yourselves up into a balance whine frenzy: 1. We've seen some tentative Raven builds start coming out of MVP, one of the forerunners of Terran strategy. 2. We don't think these specific balance changes are super-critical to keeping Terrans from dropping off the map, seeing as there are still some very strong Terrans in the highest level of play (which is what we're balancing the game for). 3. Depending on how these Raven builds end up shaping out, this patch could either be necessary, not necessary but beneficial, or in an extreme edge case, end up making ZvT nearly unwinnable because Ravens are too strong. 4. Given the above, we're going to sit back for a little and watch MVP do what he does best before deciding whether this patch should go through. It looks like he's on to something, and once he hits a new standard build, it doesn't take long for it to filter down to the rest of the pro scene and the ladder, rebalancing things without us needing to intervene.
And all 4 of these reasons are handily dismissed by the fact that it was Metropolis.
On September 03 2012 00:46 Acritter wrote: Holy hell, this thread is pathetic. Here's the reasoning of DKim, if any of you actually care and aren't just whipping yourselves up into a balance whine frenzy: 1. We've seen some tentative Raven builds start coming out of MVP, one of the forerunners of Terran strategy. 2. We don't think these specific balance changes are super-critical to keeping Terrans from dropping off the map, seeing as there are still some very strong Terrans in the highest level of play (which is what we're balancing the game for). 3. Depending on how these Raven builds end up shaping out, this patch could either be necessary, not necessary but beneficial, or in an extreme edge case, end up making ZvT nearly unwinnable because Ravens are too strong. 4. Given the above, we're going to sit back for a little and watch MVP do what he does best before deciding whether this patch should go through. It looks like he's on to something, and once he hits a new standard build, it doesn't take long for it to filter down to the rest of the pro scene and the ladder, rebalancing things without us needing to intervene.
And all 4 of these reasons are handily dismissed by the fact that it was Metropolis.
On September 02 2012 22:15 Elldar wrote: The range upgrade for queen only helped against abusive contains with four hellions and the zerg could do nothing that was going to be a bang for the buck solution, I assume that the intention were prevent that by having the queen having the same range as hellions. You could go roaches but that wasn't a great solution to the contain issue, and getting more queens didn't help either. Hellion run-by is still possible for terran, but they are not as abusive as before when 6 hellions literaly could destroy with not much the zerg could do about it without playing safe on two base and no go out with queens, which led to stale possibilities for the zerg player.
Still hilarious how people think playing fair is so horrible. Newsflash: one-Factory Reactor Hellion contain is cost-effectively broken by making a handful of Roaches. The Factory and 4 Hellions alone are 550/100, and that is discounting the Reactor and the lab-rax failsafe in case of Roach aggression. 4 Roaches and a Warren costs 500/100 and easily drives out the handful of Hellions. So do the math and stop spreading lies please.
On September 02 2012 18:42 kckkryptonite wrote: Guys, DKim is saying Terran just has to figure out new stuff, just like Zergs did over the course of 2 years, remember how Zergs adapted to Terran stuff like Reapers, 2rax, Hellions, Ghosts, etc.? The reason Zerg is the most played race is because it takes the most skill and learning to adapt. If you're a foreigner, Terran is a great and simple race to play since it's not as complex and mechanically demanding as Zerg; there's so much stuff Zerg has to constantly scout for, they can't just build one unit, not scout at all, or do the same exact build every time and be safe.
I'm actually not trying to complain, I don't mind the balance right now (T btw). But I find it funny that every single build/unit you listed was nerfed, and that's how zerg adapted to them.
Reapers, speed after fact -> reapers dead 2 rax, bunker build time and salvage nerf hellions, damage nerf to not 3 shot workers instead of 2 shot ghosts, snipe damage nerf
Again, not trying to complain. I lose because i'm bad, and I know it! Formerly masters, took like a 5 month+ break now diamond and moving back up towards masters.
That kck post is so thick with sarcasm you could cut it with a knife. Upgrade your detectors
except the Hellions are 5 times faster moving than the Roaches and so the Terran gains complete site of the entire map while the Zerg is left wondering if Terran has 5 command centres.
On September 02 2012 22:15 Elldar wrote: The range upgrade for queen only helped against abusive contains with four hellions and the zerg could do nothing that was going to be a bang for the buck solution, I assume that the intention were prevent that by having the queen having the same range as hellions. You could go roaches but that wasn't a great solution to the contain issue, and getting more queens didn't help either. Hellion run-by is still possible for terran, but they are not as abusive as before when 6 hellions literaly could destroy with not much the zerg could do about it without playing safe on two base and no go out with queens, which led to stale possibilities for the zerg player.
Still hilarious how people think playing fair is so horrible. Newsflash: one-Factory Reactor Hellion contain is cost-effectively broken by making a handful of Roaches. The Factory and 4 Hellions alone are 550/100, and that is discounting the Reactor and the lab-rax failsafe in case of Roach aggression. 4 Roaches and a Warren costs 500/100 and easily drives out the handful of Hellions. So do the math and stop spreading lies please.
On September 02 2012 18:42 kckkryptonite wrote: Guys, DKim is saying Terran just has to figure out new stuff, just like Zergs did over the course of 2 years, remember how Zergs adapted to Terran stuff like Reapers, 2rax, Hellions, Ghosts, etc.? The reason Zerg is the most played race is because it takes the most skill and learning to adapt. If you're a foreigner, Terran is a great and simple race to play since it's not as complex and mechanically demanding as Zerg; there's so much stuff Zerg has to constantly scout for, they can't just build one unit, not scout at all, or do the same exact build every time and be safe.
I'm actually not trying to complain, I don't mind the balance right now (T btw). But I find it funny that every single build/unit you listed was nerfed, and that's how zerg adapted to them.
Reapers, speed after fact -> reapers dead 2 rax, bunker build time and salvage nerf hellions, damage nerf to not 3 shot workers instead of 2 shot ghosts, snipe damage nerf
Again, not trying to complain. I lose because i'm bad, and I know it! Formerly masters, took like a 5 month+ break now diamond and moving back up towards masters.
That kck post is so thick with sarcasm you could cut it with a knife. Upgrade your detectors
except the Hellions are 5 times faster moving than the Roaches and so the Terran gains complete site of the entire map while the Zerg is left wondering if Terran has 5 command centres.
You got an Overlord buff to help with the secretive all-in problems Zergs were (apparently) having.
You get complete sight of the map once Creep is spread, and it's a *lot* better than the limited vision of Hellions.
Demuslim said on stream, confirmed by personal friend on an NA professional team that Blizz has confirmed to the pro-teams that fungal is being nurfed, changed to a slow instead of a stun. I have no official source obviously becasue they haven't officially released anything about it, but soon my brothers just wait and see, also its somewhere on Demu's vods.
Is this guy just messing with me or can anyone confirm that Demuslim did indeed say that? If so, then FINALLY!
I want to believe.
If this is true: fucking FINALLY!
Name one unit the infestor is not good against. I doubt there is one, maybe the anti-caster unit ghost. The infestor got to keep all its imba shit because it was needed - zergs would just die otherwise. Now zergs seem to do just fine and maybe a bit more. Nerfing the infestor is a much better thing than to change raven speed an acceleration.
The stun basically makes the 9-range, 75 energy aoe instant effect spell able to stack by casting chain fungals. Compare this to the 125 energy, 6-range slow missile HSM. If fungal stuns, then at the very least HSM could be reduced to 100 energy so that a full energy raven can cast 2 missiles. Either this change or a HSM speed buff could be warranted. Faster HSM would make the game harder for the opponents since it would introduce more in-battle micro for splitting your clumped units up. Terran already has to do micro like this vs AOE like storm,fungal or tanks .
But if stun is removed a lot is changed. Maybe then the raven needs no tweaking at all.
The anti-micro spells fungal and forcefields have always made me feel that a big amount of fun is taken out of the game with them. At least terran has semi-good measures vs forcefields with medivac lifts, ghosts, long range tanks and sometimes even thors I am more worried about zergs as their only way of breaking a cast forcefield is with a T3 ultra. I have seen so many games turn into an auto-win for the protoss because the zerg let up the control of a ramp for a second only to have it blocked indefinitely by forcefields.
Frustrating things like these are what makes me enjoy the game less, while it makes less fanatic Sc2 fans stop playing the game completely.
If they removed fungal stun, made forcefields destroyable and tweaked blink so that it requires a unit that is actually on the high ground itself to be able to blink up then Blizzard would have a more fun game to play. Surely high level pros can remedy these things, but for me who is never gonna make even GM it just ruins the fun. I am not kidding, if a protoss scouts your 1 rax expand they will 75% of the time go for 4 gate blink stalker all in. It is insanely hard to hold even if scouted as it is possible to put the observer so that it gives enough vision for blink but is too far away for marines to snipe it.
On September 02 2012 22:15 Elldar wrote: The range upgrade for queen only helped against abusive contains with four hellions and the zerg could do nothing that was going to be a bang for the buck solution, I assume that the intention were prevent that by having the queen having the same range as hellions. You could go roaches but that wasn't a great solution to the contain issue, and getting more queens didn't help either. Hellion run-by is still possible for terran, but they are not as abusive as before when 6 hellions literaly could destroy with not much the zerg could do about it without playing safe on two base and no go out with queens, which led to stale possibilities for the zerg player.
Still hilarious how people think playing fair is so horrible. Newsflash: one-Factory Reactor Hellion contain is cost-effectively broken by making a handful of Roaches. The Factory and 4 Hellions alone are 550/100, and that is discounting the Reactor and the lab-rax failsafe in case of Roach aggression. 4 Roaches and a Warren costs 500/100 and easily drives out the handful of Hellions. So do the math and stop spreading lies please.
On September 02 2012 18:42 kckkryptonite wrote: Guys, DKim is saying Terran just has to figure out new stuff, just like Zergs did over the course of 2 years, remember how Zergs adapted to Terran stuff like Reapers, 2rax, Hellions, Ghosts, etc.? The reason Zerg is the most played race is because it takes the most skill and learning to adapt. If you're a foreigner, Terran is a great and simple race to play since it's not as complex and mechanically demanding as Zerg; there's so much stuff Zerg has to constantly scout for, they can't just build one unit, not scout at all, or do the same exact build every time and be safe.
I'm actually not trying to complain, I don't mind the balance right now (T btw). But I find it funny that every single build/unit you listed was nerfed, and that's how zerg adapted to them.
Reapers, speed after fact -> reapers dead 2 rax, bunker build time and salvage nerf hellions, damage nerf to not 3 shot workers instead of 2 shot ghosts, snipe damage nerf
Again, not trying to complain. I lose because i'm bad, and I know it! Formerly masters, took like a 5 month+ break now diamond and moving back up towards masters.
That kck post is so thick with sarcasm you could cut it with a knife. Upgrade your detectors
except the Hellions are 5 times faster moving than the Roaches and so the Terran gains complete site of the entire map while the Zerg is left wondering if Terran has 5 command centres.
Quality post. For your knowledge Reactor Hellion quadruple expand was never standard, but who knows? Maybe someday, when Hellions get 11,25 movespeed?
I don't know how many years it will take Blizzard to realize fungal growth shouldn't block air movement.
And yeah :
On September 02 2012 18:42 kckkryptonite wrote: Guys, DKim is saying Terran just has to figure out new stuff, just like Zergs did over the course of 2 years, remember how Zergs adapted to Terran stuff like Reapers, 2rax, Hellions, Ghosts, etc.? The reason Zerg is the most played race is because it takes the most skill and learning to adapt. If you're a foreigner, Terran is a great and simple race to play since it's not as complex and mechanically demanding as Zerg; there's so much stuff Zerg has to constantly scout for, they can't just build one unit, not scout at all, or do the same exact build every time and be safe.
The game is still imballenced In TvZ. Terran, needs to micro the most. U need to split Marines aginst Banes, (banes Only require a the player to A-Move) and Fungal. Terran Macro is the hardest. Zerg just presses "S", and boom. u juist chose what you want. Terran, had three different Macro buildings. I have a god winrate, Vs Zerg, but I have had to work a lot. And Mvp, AND the top Koreans dont mean anything, they are just better than everyone
Demuslim said on stream, confirmed by personal friend on an NA professional team that Blizz has confirmed to the pro-teams that fungal is being nurfed, changed to a slow instead of a stun. I have no official source obviously becasue they haven't officially released anything about it, but soon my brothers just wait and see, also its somewhere on Demu's vods.
Is this guy just messing with me or can anyone confirm that Demuslim did indeed say that? If so, then FINALLY!
I want to believe.
If this is true: fucking FINALLY!
Name one unit the infestor is not good against. I doubt there is one, maybe the anti-caster unit ghost. The infestor got to keep all its imba shit because it was needed - zergs would just die otherwise. Now zergs seem to do just fine and maybe a bit more. Nerfing the infestor is a much better thing than to change raven speed an acceleration.
The stun basically makes the 9-range, 75 energy aoe instant effect spell able to stack by casting chain fungals. Compare this to the 125 energy, 6-range slow missile HSM. If fungal stuns, then at the very least HSM could be reduced to 100 energy so that a full energy raven can cast 2 missiles. Either this change or a HSM speed buff could be warranted. Faster HSM would make the game harder for the opponents since it would introduce more in-battle micro for splitting your clumped units up. Terran already has to do micro like this vs AOE like storm,fungal or tanks .
But if stun is removed a lot is changed. Maybe then the raven needs no tweaking at all.
The anti-micro spells fungal and forcefields have always made me feel that a big amount of fun is taken out of the game with them. At least terran has semi-good measures vs forcefields with medivac lifts, ghosts, long range tanks and sometimes even thors I am more worried about zergs as their only way of breaking a cast forcefield is with a T3 ultra. I have seen so many games turn into an auto-win for the protoss because the zerg let up the control of a ramp for a second only to have it blocked indefinitely by forcefields.
Frustrating things like these are what makes me enjoy the game less, while it makes less fanatic Sc2 fans stop playing the game completely.
If they removed fungal stun, made forcefields destroyable and tweaked blink so that it requires a unit that is actually on the high ground itself to be able to blink up then Blizzard would have a more fun game to play. Surely high level pros can remedy these things, but for me who is never gonna make even GM it just ruins the fun. I am not kidding, if a protoss scouts your 1 rax expand they will 75% of the time go for 4 gate blink stalker all in. It is insanely hard to hold even if scouted as it is possible to put the observer so that it gives enough vision for blink but is too far away for marines to snipe it.
Demuslim said on stream, confirmed by personal friend on an NA professional team that Blizz has confirmed to the pro-teams that fungal is being nurfed, changed to a slow instead of a stun. I have no official source obviously becasue they haven't officially released anything about it, but soon my brothers just wait and see, also its somewhere on Demu's vods.
Is this guy just messing with me or can anyone confirm that Demuslim did indeed say that? If so, then FINALLY!
I want to believe.
If this is true: fucking FINALLY!
Name one unit the infestor is not good against. I doubt there is one, maybe the anti-caster unit ghost. The infestor got to keep all its imba shit because it was needed - zergs would just die otherwise. Now zergs seem to do just fine and maybe a bit more. Nerfing the infestor is a much better thing than to change raven speed an acceleration.
The stun basically makes the 9-range, 75 energy aoe instant effect spell able to stack by casting chain fungals. Compare this to the 125 energy, 6-range slow missile HSM. If fungal stuns, then at the very least HSM could be reduced to 100 energy so that a full energy raven can cast 2 missiles. Either this change or a HSM speed buff could be warranted. Faster HSM would make the game harder for the opponents since it would introduce more in-battle micro for splitting your clumped units up. Terran already has to do micro like this vs AOE like storm,fungal or tanks .
But if stun is removed a lot is changed. Maybe then the raven needs no tweaking at all.
The anti-micro spells fungal and forcefields have always made me feel that a big amount of fun is taken out of the game with them. At least terran has semi-good measures vs forcefields with medivac lifts, ghosts, long range tanks and sometimes even thors I am more worried about zergs as their only way of breaking a cast forcefield is with a T3 ultra. I have seen so many games turn into an auto-win for the protoss because the zerg let up the control of a ramp for a second only to have it blocked indefinitely by forcefields.
Frustrating things like these are what makes me enjoy the game less, while it makes less fanatic Sc2 fans stop playing the game completely.
If they removed fungal stun, made forcefields destroyable and tweaked blink so that it requires a unit that is actually on the high ground itself to be able to blink up then Blizzard would have a more fun game to play. Surely high level pros can remedy these things, but for me who is never gonna make even GM it just ruins the fun. I am not kidding, if a protoss scouts your 1 rax expand they will 75% of the time go for 4 gate blink stalker all in. It is insanely hard to hold even if scouted as it is possible to put the observer so that it gives enough vision for blink but is too far away for marines to snipe it.
For forcefields, in my opinion they are not the horrible micro-reducing spell that so many people make it out to be. We've seen some amazing anti-force field micro, such as evacuating with a medivac. It takes 3-4 force fields to actually trap a part of an army, and if it only takes one (because of a ramp) then the T/Z deserves to get killed for running up a ramp without sending a single unit up first to see if there could be force fields. Also, zerg should have a good overlord spread if they scouted a potential warp prism build. If you know a WP could be incoming, you need to be prepared for it. It's just like burrowed infestors taking out a nexus because there wasn't detector. Honestly, ling run-by's are far worse than a warp prism in the main. I've seen many pros lose to standard run-by's because the warped in zealot didn't fully block off the entrance to the base. However, sentry/warpprism is a very heavy investment, if it fails P is so far behind. If a ling run-by fails, there are 4 lings killed. The point of that is every race has stuff that seems super abusive, and is hard to stop but is definitely possible to prevent.
As for blink stalkers, I think you are just complaining about a build that you have trouble holding. Based on forum browsing, there are not that many people that have trouble with blink stalker all-ins. Not blinking to the high ground is a huge nerf to protoss, so unless the blink stalker all-in was a huge issue, I don't think it warrants the nerf.
On September 01 2012 01:14 Swords wrote: Here's the problem with this. When DKim made the Queen range/overlord speed patch TvZ was at the most balanced it had been in a long time. I believe the winrates were 51%/49% or something like that - in any case it was extremely close at the highest levels. Why on earth was that change made if the balance was looking great? Especially when it was an absolutely massive change, completely buffing both Zerg's scouting ability and defensive/macro unit (worth noting: I do think overlord speed was a fine buff, but both at once was absurd - especially when you talk about a "slowly developing game" as Kim does above).
I don't really have the authority to comment on if TvZ is balanced now, but one thing is for sure, as a spectator of TvZ matches in tournaments it has become a lot more boring to watch. The proposed Raven patch wasn't going to fix the 10 minute early game snore-fest TvZ has become, and all this latest situation report has convinced me of is Blizzard just makes up stuff as they go along - if statistics actually mattered to them they wouldn't have patched queens in the first place.
For reasons as you give and more, Blizzard's statements have lost any credibility with me. I no longer suspend disbelief. The inconsistencies are wild and they pile up. I wish there were more logic, consistency and openness even if we're still going not to get the aid we hope for.
Demuslim said on stream, confirmed by personal friend on an NA professional team that Blizz has confirmed to the pro-teams that fungal is being nurfed, changed to a slow instead of a stun. I have no official source obviously becasue they haven't officially released anything about it, but soon my brothers just wait and see, also its somewhere on Demu's vods.
Is this guy just messing with me or can anyone confirm that Demuslim did indeed say that? If so, then FINALLY!
I want to believe.
If this is true: fucking FINALLY!
Name one unit the infestor is not good against. I doubt there is one, maybe the anti-caster unit ghost. The infestor got to keep all its imba shit because it was needed - zergs would just die otherwise. Now zergs seem to do just fine and maybe a bit more. Nerfing the infestor is a much better thing than to change raven speed an acceleration.
The stun basically makes the 9-range, 75 energy aoe instant effect spell able to stack by casting chain fungals. Compare this to the 125 energy, 6-range slow missile HSM. If fungal stuns, then at the very least HSM could be reduced to 100 energy so that a full energy raven can cast 2 missiles. Either this change or a HSM speed buff could be warranted. Faster HSM would make the game harder for the opponents since it would introduce more in-battle micro for splitting your clumped units up. Terran already has to do micro like this vs AOE like storm,fungal or tanks .
But if stun is removed a lot is changed. Maybe then the raven needs no tweaking at all.
The anti-micro spells fungal and forcefields have always made me feel that a big amount of fun is taken out of the game with them. At least terran has semi-good measures vs forcefields with medivac lifts, ghosts, long range tanks and sometimes even thors I am more worried about zergs as their only way of breaking a cast forcefield is with a T3 ultra. I have seen so many games turn into an auto-win for the protoss because the zerg let up the control of a ramp for a second only to have it blocked indefinitely by forcefields.
Frustrating things like these are what makes me enjoy the game less, while it makes less fanatic Sc2 fans stop playing the game completely.
If they removed fungal stun, made forcefields destroyable and tweaked blink so that it requires a unit that is actually on the high ground itself to be able to blink up then Blizzard would have a more fun game to play. Surely high level pros can remedy these things, but for me who is never gonna make even GM it just ruins the fun. I am not kidding, if a protoss scouts your 1 rax expand they will 75% of the time go for 4 gate blink stalker all in. It is insanely hard to hold even if scouted as it is possible to put the observer so that it gives enough vision for blink but is too far away for marines to snipe it.
For forcefields, in my opinion they are not the horrible micro-reducing spell that so many people make it out to be. We've seen some amazing anti-force field micro, such as evacuating with a medivac. It takes 3-4 force fields to actually trap a part of an army, and if it only takes one (because of a ramp) then the T/Z deserves to get killed for running up a ramp without sending a single unit up first to see if there could be force fields. Also, zerg should have a good overlord spread if they scouted a potential warp prism build. If you know a WP could be incoming, you need to be prepared for it. It's just like burrowed infestors taking out a nexus because there wasn't detector. Honestly, ling run-by's are far worse than a warp prism in the main. I've seen many pros lose to standard run-by's because the warped in zealot didn't fully block off the entrance to the base. However, sentry/warpprism is a very heavy investment, if it fails P is so far behind. If a ling run-by fails, there are 4 lings killed. The point of that is every race has stuff that seems super abusive, and is hard to stop but is definitely possible to prevent.
As for blink stalkers, I think you are just complaining about a build that you have trouble holding. Based on forum browsing, there are not that many people that have trouble with blink stalker all-ins. Not blinking to the high ground is a huge nerf to protoss, so unless the blink stalker all-in was a huge issue, I don't think it warrants the nerf.
Regarding FF, I would like, with all due respect (and I mean it) to point your attention to one thing: amazing micro as a counter vs unqualified (presumably somewhat competent but rather average) forcefields. I am inclined to question the heavy reliance of Terran balance on micro for countres to strategies or tactics that don't require it or require less of it.
Demuslim said on stream, confirmed by personal friend on an NA professional team that Blizz has confirmed to the pro-teams that fungal is being nurfed, changed to a slow instead of a stun. I have no official source obviously becasue they haven't officially released anything about it, but soon my brothers just wait and see, also its somewhere on Demu's vods.
Is this guy just messing with me or can anyone confirm that Demuslim did indeed say that? If so, then FINALLY!
I want to believe.
If this is true: fucking FINALLY!
Name one unit the infestor is not good against. I doubt there is one, maybe the anti-caster unit ghost. The infestor got to keep all its imba shit because it was needed - zergs would just die otherwise. Now zergs seem to do just fine and maybe a bit more. Nerfing the infestor is a much better thing than to change raven speed an acceleration.
The stun basically makes the 9-range, 75 energy aoe instant effect spell able to stack by casting chain fungals. Compare this to the 125 energy, 6-range slow missile HSM. If fungal stuns, then at the very least HSM could be reduced to 100 energy so that a full energy raven can cast 2 missiles. Either this change or a HSM speed buff could be warranted. Faster HSM would make the game harder for the opponents since it would introduce more in-battle micro for splitting your clumped units up. Terran already has to do micro like this vs AOE like storm,fungal or tanks .
But if stun is removed a lot is changed. Maybe then the raven needs no tweaking at all.
The anti-micro spells fungal and forcefields have always made me feel that a big amount of fun is taken out of the game with them. At least terran has semi-good measures vs forcefields with medivac lifts, ghosts, long range tanks and sometimes even thors I am more worried about zergs as their only way of breaking a cast forcefield is with a T3 ultra. I have seen so many games turn into an auto-win for the protoss because the zerg let up the control of a ramp for a second only to have it blocked indefinitely by forcefields.
Frustrating things like these are what makes me enjoy the game less, while it makes less fanatic Sc2 fans stop playing the game completely.
If they removed fungal stun, made forcefields destroyable and tweaked blink so that it requires a unit that is actually on the high ground itself to be able to blink up then Blizzard would have a more fun game to play. Surely high level pros can remedy these things, but for me who is never gonna make even GM it just ruins the fun. I am not kidding, if a protoss scouts your 1 rax expand they will 75% of the time go for 4 gate blink stalker all in. It is insanely hard to hold even if scouted as it is possible to put the observer so that it gives enough vision for blink but is too far away for marines to snipe it.
For forcefields, in my opinion they are not the horrible micro-reducing spell that so many people make it out to be. We've seen some amazing anti-force field micro, such as evacuating with a medivac. It takes 3-4 force fields to actually trap a part of an army, and if it only takes one (because of a ramp) then the T/Z deserves to get killed for running up a ramp without sending a single unit up first to see if there could be force fields. Also, zerg should have a good overlord spread if they scouted a potential warp prism build. If you know a WP could be incoming, you need to be prepared for it. It's just like burrowed infestors taking out a nexus because there wasn't detector. Honestly, ling run-by's are far worse than a warp prism in the main. I've seen many pros lose to standard run-by's because the warped in zealot didn't fully block off the entrance to the base. However, sentry/warpprism is a very heavy investment, if it fails P is so far behind. If a ling run-by fails, there are 4 lings killed. The point of that is every race has stuff that seems super abusive, and is hard to stop but is definitely possible to prevent.
As for blink stalkers, I think you are just complaining about a build that you have trouble holding. Based on forum browsing, there are not that many people that have trouble with blink stalker all-ins. Not blinking to the high ground is a huge nerf to protoss, so unless the blink stalker all-in was a huge issue, I don't think it warrants the nerf.
I am not saying that it should not be possible to blink up to high ground, just that the observer giving vision should have to be close enough for marines to snipe it. It is always like this on TL, why can't you read what I wrote and address that instead of twisting my words ? I am trying a 1-rax expand into 1-1-1 for cloaked banshees that I saw MVP do. Holding the blink stalker all in is seriously hard if the protoss doesn't fuck things up. I have no idea how to stop it.
I believe that the maps still need improvements for some balance stuff.
Im thinking that creep spread is just too powerfull, it gives to many things to the zerg, more speed but overall it gives them vision. That allows that you never be able to do army movements against them, one of the more interest stuff in the TvT MU.. I remember from BW that tank lines plus turrets were OP because there were no cost efective way to break them, so what they did in the map, uncontructible terrain, so guess what you could have creep in your side of the map like is suppouse to be, and not the whole map.
I believe people forget the bases of strategy that we learn in BW. The more important stuff is macro and information. Well the ability for zerg to gain information in simply to strong.
About fungal, i believe zerg need something to kill drops without loses if got spoted, something like the scourge, but in WoL they don't have anything aside to the inferstor, they don't have nor cheap nor mobile antiair, the problem with the drops is that the are pretty mobile and can pickup all the people at one, for me were allways a joke that terrans could do a drop and then the zerlings came and they just pickup and leave, is like cheating (i believe the new protoss recall from the nexus has the same problem btw) because zerg cannot do anything, so the solution is the infestor, but is pretty bad for me that the zerg best anti air is the infested terran, is just... horrible, I will aproach the no stun but root, (you could use abilities) in ground units and slow in flighting units.
I really rooting for the hidra buff in HOTs, but is a new game so we need to balance that stuff also
Demuslim said on stream, confirmed by personal friend on an NA professional team that Blizz has confirmed to the pro-teams that fungal is being nurfed, changed to a slow instead of a stun. I have no official source obviously becasue they haven't officially released anything about it, but soon my brothers just wait and see, also its somewhere on Demu's vods.
Is this guy just messing with me or can anyone confirm that Demuslim did indeed say that? If so, then FINALLY!
I want to believe.
If this is true: fucking FINALLY!
Name one unit the infestor is not good against. I doubt there is one, maybe the anti-caster unit ghost. The infestor got to keep all its imba shit because it was needed - zergs would just die otherwise. Now zergs seem to do just fine and maybe a bit more. Nerfing the infestor is a much better thing than to change raven speed an acceleration.
The stun basically makes the 9-range, 75 energy aoe instant effect spell able to stack by casting chain fungals. Compare this to the 125 energy, 6-range slow missile HSM. If fungal stuns, then at the very least HSM could be reduced to 100 energy so that a full energy raven can cast 2 missiles. Either this change or a HSM speed buff could be warranted. Faster HSM would make the game harder for the opponents since it would introduce more in-battle micro for splitting your clumped units up. Terran already has to do micro like this vs AOE like storm,fungal or tanks .
But if stun is removed a lot is changed. Maybe then the raven needs no tweaking at all.
The anti-micro spells fungal and forcefields have always made me feel that a big amount of fun is taken out of the game with them. At least terran has semi-good measures vs forcefields with medivac lifts, ghosts, long range tanks and sometimes even thors I am more worried about zergs as their only way of breaking a cast forcefield is with a T3 ultra. I have seen so many games turn into an auto-win for the protoss because the zerg let up the control of a ramp for a second only to have it blocked indefinitely by forcefields.
Frustrating things like these are what makes me enjoy the game less, while it makes less fanatic Sc2 fans stop playing the game completely.
If they removed fungal stun, made forcefields destroyable and tweaked blink so that it requires a unit that is actually on the high ground itself to be able to blink up then Blizzard would have a more fun game to play. Surely high level pros can remedy these things, but for me who is never gonna make even GM it just ruins the fun. I am not kidding, if a protoss scouts your 1 rax expand they will 75% of the time go for 4 gate blink stalker all in. It is insanely hard to hold even if scouted as it is possible to put the observer so that it gives enough vision for blink but is too far away for marines to snipe it.
On September 03 2012 01:38 camilocraft wrote: About fungal, i believe zerg need something to kill drops without loses if got spoted, something like the scourge, but in WoL they don't have anything aside to the inferstor, they don't have nor cheap nor mobile antiair, the problem with the drops is that the are pretty mobile and can pickup all the people at one, for me were allways a joke that terrans could do a drop and then the zerlings came and they just pickup and leave, is like cheating (i believe the new protoss recall from the nexus has the same problem btw) because zerg cannot do anything
? Mutalisks, Spines, Spores, Zerglings and/or Banes patrolling... Why would you pretend that Infestors are the only answer to deal with drops? You don't particularly care about him picking up (which is not possible against Mutalisks too anyway) as long as you avoid damage to your economy or tech buildings. It's like saying “Mutalisks sniping Reactors or SCVs then just flying away when you stim Marines is like cheating,” doesn't make much sense.
On September 03 2012 01:38 camilocraft wrote: I believe that the maps still need improvements for some balance stuff.
Im thinking that creep spread is just too powerfull, it gives to many things to the zerg, more speed but overall it gives them vision. That allows that you never be able to do army movements against them, one of the more interest stuff in the TvT MU.. I remember from BW that tank lines plus turrets were OP because there were no cost efective way to break them, so what they did in the map, uncontructible terrain, so guess what you could have creep in your side of the map like is suppouse to be, and not the whole map.
I believe people forget the bases of strategy that we learn in BW. The more important stuff is macro and information. Well the ability for zerg to gain information in simply to strong.
About fungal, i believe zerg need something to kill drops without loses if got spoted, something like the scourge, but in WoL they don't have anything aside to the inferstor, they don't have nor cheap nor mobile antiair, the problem with the drops is that the are pretty mobile and can pickup all the people at one, for me were allways a joke that terrans could do a drop and then the zerlings came and they just pickup and leave, is like cheating (i believe the new protoss recall from the nexus has the same problem btw) because zerg cannot do anything, so the solution is the infestor, but is pretty bad for me that the zerg best anti air is the infested terran, is just... horrible, I will aproach the no stun but root, (you could use abilities) in ground units and slow in flighting units.
I really rooting for the hidra buff in HOTs, but is a new game so we need to balance that stuff also
Well, Terran and Protoss don't really have a way to kill Mutas when they get spotted, and we seem to get along okay.
If fungal was changed from stop effect to slow effect, I could die a happy man. I don't think Blizzard has it in them to make such a sensible change, though.
On September 03 2012 01:38 camilocraft wrote: I believe that the maps still need improvements for some balance stuff.
I see the problem of maps vs balance being raised more and more. Personally, I'm of the belief that fixing numbers can fix balance only to a limited extent, while win ratio statistics provide only limited evidence.
Im thinking that creep spread is just too powerfull, it gives to many things to the zerg, more speed but overall it gives them vision. That allows that you never be able to do army movements against them, one of the more interest stuff in the TvT MU.. I remember from BW that tank lines plus turrets were OP because there were no cost efective way to break them, so what they did in the map, uncontructible terrain, so guess what you could have creep in your side of the map like is suppouse to be, and not the whole map.
I believe people forget the bases of strategy that we learn in BW. The more important stuff is macro and information. Well the ability for zerg to gain information in simply to strong.
Yes, addressing the spread speed seems to be a very tangential way of dealing with the design issue whereby creep tumors provide vision of the map.
About fungal, i believe zerg need something to kill drops without loses if got spoted, something like the scourge, but in WoL they don't have anything aside to the inferstor, they don't have nor cheap nor mobile antiair, the problem with the drops is that the are pretty mobile and can pickup all the people at one, for me were allways a joke that terrans could do a drop and then the zerlings came and they just pickup and leave, is like cheating (i believe the new protoss recall from the nexus has the same problem btw) because zerg cannot do anything, so the solution is the infestor, but is pretty bad for me that the zerg best anti air is the infested terran, is just... horrible, I will aproach the no stun but root, (you could use abilities) in ground units and slow in flighting units.
Perhaps infestor has been streamlined into being too much of a catchall counter, creating some negative sentiments.
On September 03 2012 01:51 acrimoneyius wrote: If fungal was changed from stop effect to slow effect, I could die a happy man. I don't think Blizzard has it in them to make such a sensible change, though.
On September 03 2012 01:38 camilocraft wrote: I believe that the maps still need improvements for some balance stuff.
I see the problem of maps vs balance being raised more and more. Personally, I'm of the belief that fixing numbers can fix balance only to a limited extent, while win ratio statistics provide only limited evidence.
I think the problem is that if you tweak the map too much in order to balance a certain match up, then an other match up could be ruined. Like if you get a map with 50-50 winratio for TvZ, then maybe it could make the winrate be 70-30 in TvP, just as an example.
I believe we should have different maps for different matchups if blizzard can't deal with balance properly. Also with HotS coming up, it will have chaotic balance and everything gonna be unbalanced unless blizzard somehow magically fixes all the abuseful and imbalanced strategies in beta while also having the players achieve a metagame with balanced winrates.
Though, from my experience and watching tournaments. I saw that mech has a lot of potential in TvZ and I feel that those players who are struggling in TvZ aren't using mech correctly and have suboptimal mech openers. Maybe the terrans really need to just adapt and improve instead of getting buffed.
On September 03 2012 01:19 SC_THORLORD wrote: The game is still imballenced In TvZ. Terran, needs to micro the most. U need to split Marines aginst Banes, (banes Only require a the player to A-Move) and Fungal. Terran Macro is the hardest. Zerg just presses "S", and boom. u juist chose what you want. Terran, had three different Macro buildings. I have a god winrate, Vs Zerg, but I have had to work a lot. And Mvp, AND the top Koreans dont mean anything, they are just better than everyone
1. You don't amove banes. 2. Zerg has equal capacity to split their lings/banes against tanks. It's 2x harder, they don't really need to, and flanking is almost as effective. 3. They don't inject, spread creep or manage overlord position around the map either. You must play zerg a lot. 4. You don't fight the zergs MVP or the top Koreans play. 5. imballenced, lol
this is lame. z & p gets buffs when considered UP. terran gets the shaft cause 2 guys (the best in the world) can win. i guess we'll just have to wait for zergs to learn how to split units. then maybe they will give terrans an anti-splitting spell too.
About fungal, i believe zerg need something to kill drops without loses if got spoted, something like the scourge, but in WoL they don't have anything aside to the inferstor, they don't have nor cheap nor mobile antiair, the problem with the drops is that the are pretty mobile and can pickup all the people at one, for me were allways a joke that terrans could do a drop and then the zerlings came and they just pickup and leave, is like cheating (i believe the new protoss recall from the nexus has the same problem btw) because zerg cannot do anything, so the solution is the infestor, but is pretty bad for me that the zerg best anti air is the infested terran, is just... horrible, I will aproach the no stun but root, (you could use abilities) in ground units and slow in flighting units.
I really rooting for the hidra buff in HOTs, but is a new game so we need to balance that stuff also
I couldn't agree with you more. Here's a few of my gripes:
for me were allways a joke that terrans could build a bunker next to my natural hatchery and then the zerlings came and they just repair with scvs, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could kill all my drones with hellions and then the zerlings came and they just kite and leave, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could make buildings and then the zerlings came and they just lift and leave is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terran could send banshees and then the zerlings came and they just keep shooting is like cheating
I think that the easiest and most obvious solution here is to have zerlings shoot air. They got dem strong legs, so it makes sense they can jump and hop onto those medivacs and flying orbital commends.
On September 03 2012 02:18 Adonminus wrote: Though, from my experience and watching tournaments. I saw that mech has a lot of potential in TvZ and I feel that those players who are struggling in TvZ aren't using mech correctly and have suboptimal mech openers.
Mech relies on killing enough drones early game with Hellions/Banshees not to get crushed by 13'30 max Roach drop (possibly multi-pronged) or 15 minuts BL. Over time Zergs will learn how to defend properly this harass and it won't be standard anymore to get between 20 and 60 (!) Drone kills by the 10' mark, which of course makes the follow-up viable.
I think one of the bigger problems with mech is that it's undeniably 100x more boring and less rewarding of control than bio is. Unless mech is modified in some way to become stronger (i.e. so that it's viable) but only when controlled really well (kinda like how MMM only really works for players who have excellent micro) then it's always going to be either underpowered, uninteresting, or uninspired.
On September 02 2012 13:37 fawkz wrote: this thread is an abortion. every zerg posting here is just downplaying the HUGE imbalance so they keep their inflated patchzerg winrates, while every terran is begging for a balanced matchup, ie before last patch.
makes me sad, i used to love blizzard games.
Then you released that you were not very good at SC2 and decided it was Blizzard's fault? Or maybe the patchzergs?
yes me and every other terran have trouble with shitty zergs lol....even taeja and mvp have said zerg is op..but SURE BRO keep pretending the terrans you beat on ladder are worse than you..and that your zerg is actually good...whatever helps you sleep..
Where did Taeja and MVP say that? I honestly want to know so I can read it for myself.
both said it in interviews but i dont know which one..the taeja one was very recent, mvp a couple months ago..if you search i KNOW you can find them!
lol seems legit.
yes..it does do some searching or you might look like a giant douche like this kid
Dude chill out, your attacks are just making you look like a giant douche. And if it's really so simple to find, why not find it yourself, since you are the one saying it exists?
Because we're not writing papers and turning them in for grades here. Mvp has stated within the last month that Terran is kind of a pushover right now, Taeja has called Terran the weakest race, DRG has claimed ZvT is impossible for him to lose if he doesn't screw the game up, and the list goes on. Am I going to bother digging through TL to source everything? Of course not. That'd take up a bunch of time I don't feel like spending. If you want to tell me I'm lying for no reason, go ahead. It doesn't make you not wrong though.
Didn't say you nor him were lying once, was just looking for some evidence, which the guy who posted behind you found in a jiffy. It's a lot easier to convince your opponents when you find and show evidence instead of telling them pretty much, "Screw you find it yourself."
On September 03 2012 01:19 SC_THORLORD wrote:And Mvp, AND the top Koreans dont mean anything, they are just better than everyone
Well if they are doing fine then you should stop being lazy and asking blizz to make the game easier for you and practice until you become that good, I mean seriously...
On September 03 2012 01:19 SC_THORLORD wrote:And Mvp, AND the top Koreans dont mean anything, they are just better than everyone
Well if they are doing fine then you should stop being lazy and asking blizz to make the game easier for you and practice until you become that good, I mean seriously...
On September 02 2012 22:15 Elldar wrote: The range upgrade for queen only helped against abusive contains with four hellions and the zerg could do nothing that was going to be a bang for the buck solution, I assume that the intention were prevent that by having the queen having the same range as hellions. You could go roaches but that wasn't a great solution to the contain issue, and getting more queens didn't help either. Hellion run-by is still possible for terran, but they are not as abusive as before when 6 hellions literaly could destroy with not much the zerg could do about it without playing safe on two base and no go out with queens, which led to stale possibilities for the zerg player.
Still hilarious how people think playing fair is so horrible. Newsflash: one-Factory Reactor Hellion contain is cost-effectively broken by making a handful of Roaches. The Factory and 4 Hellions alone are 550/100, and that is discounting the Reactor and the lab-rax failsafe in case of Roach aggression. 4 Roaches and a Warren costs 500/100 and easily drives out the handful of Hellions. So do the math and stop spreading lies please.
User was warned for this post
What? Then what? I take a third and hope you don't push or get banshees? Since I would have to get the roaches so early I don't have speedlings nor tech, and my third and fourth queens is delayed. I mean wtf early roaches to counter hellions has only that purpose to counter them. And you never had to engage in the first place. The hellions could easily spot a push miles away. I am not saying that roaches isn't good against terran, but the fact that you had to get them so early just puts you so far behind, that's why it was so much better get spines with wall and tech.
On September 02 2012 22:15 Elldar wrote: The range upgrade for queen only helped against abusive contains with four hellions and the zerg could do nothing that was going to be a bang for the buck solution, I assume that the intention were prevent that by having the queen having the same range as hellions. You could go roaches but that wasn't a great solution to the contain issue, and getting more queens didn't help either. Hellion run-by is still possible for terran, but they are not as abusive as before when 6 hellions literaly could destroy with not much the zerg could do about it without playing safe on two base and no go out with queens, which led to stale possibilities for the zerg player.
Still hilarious how people think playing fair is so horrible. Newsflash: one-Factory Reactor Hellion contain is cost-effectively broken by making a handful of Roaches. The Factory and 4 Hellions alone are 550/100, and that is discounting the Reactor and the lab-rax failsafe in case of Roach aggression. 4 Roaches and a Warren costs 500/100 and easily drives out the handful of Hellions. So do the math and stop spreading lies please.
User was warned for this post
Let's not forget that the races function differently. A terran can't spend all his resources on scvs, so he builds scvs while also building units. This means he must somehow use those units in order to stop the droning, and forcing roaches is just so great for him. Roaches is one of the weakest units in combat for ZvT. At the same time zerg cuts drones, and since zerg units are less cost effective even if they are even in everything, the terran will win. Zerg must always be slightly ahead in order to not die. You can't compare it like that.
About fungal, i believe zerg need something to kill drops without loses if got spoted, something like the scourge, but in WoL they don't have anything aside to the inferstor, they don't have nor cheap nor mobile antiair, the problem with the drops is that the are pretty mobile and can pickup all the people at one, for me were allways a joke that terrans could do a drop and then the zerlings came and they just pickup and leave, is like cheating (i believe the new protoss recall from the nexus has the same problem btw) because zerg cannot do anything, so the solution is the infestor, but is pretty bad for me that the zerg best anti air is the infested terran, is just... horrible, I will aproach the no stun but root, (you could use abilities) in ground units and slow in flighting units.
I really rooting for the hidra buff in HOTs, but is a new game so we need to balance that stuff also
I couldn't agree with you more. Here's a few of my gripes:
for me were allways a joke that terrans could build a bunker next to my natural hatchery and then the zerlings came and they just repair with scvs, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could kill all my drones with hellions and then the zerlings came and they just kite and leave, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could make buildings and then the zerlings came and they just lift and leave is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terran could send banshees and then the zerlings came and they just keep shooting is like cheating
I think that the easiest and most obvious solution here is to have zerlings shoot air. They got dem strong legs, so it makes sense they can jump and hop onto those medivacs and flying orbital commends.
It'd be best if overlords just spawned banelings instead of dropping creep. To address those problems you mentioned, these banelings should hit nearby airunits upon spawning, so poor Z could handle those mean drops. Make it autocast too, so you can have a nice flying minefield around your bases. Oh and move it from lair-tech to hatch-tech, anything less would be a joke, ofc.
On September 03 2012 03:11 Adonminus wrote: Let's not forget that the races function differently. A terran can't spend all his resources on scvs, so he builds scvs while also building units. This means he must somehow use those units in order to stop the droning, and forcing roaches is just so great for him. Roaches is one of the weakest units in combat for ZvT. At the same time zerg cuts drones, and since zerg units are less cost effective even if they are even in everything, the terran will win. Zerg must always be slightly ahead in order to not die. You can't compare it like that.
Reactor Hellion did not force Roaches (only BFH or 2x Reactor Hellion did); Zergs had the option to make a Roach Warren to break the Hellion contain sooner than they would with the Spine slowly moving or 20+ Zerglings trying to get a surround. Making 3-4 Roaches was a choice, not something mandatory (standard play, 2-bases Mutas, took their third later with no particular problem), and the Zerg player was not behind in economy doing so.
And I don't see how you can say that Roaches are one of the weakest units in combat for ZvT, a lot of pro Zerg players use Lings/Roaches/Infestors, various timings can be efficiently defended with Lings/Roaches/Banes—not to mention their use against mech. Obviously pure Roach would be terrible against Marines/Tanks but mixing Roaches with Lings/Banes or Lings/Infestors is not unheard of at all.
About fungal, i believe zerg need something to kill drops without loses if got spoted, something like the scourge, but in WoL they don't have anything aside to the inferstor, they don't have nor cheap nor mobile antiair, the problem with the drops is that the are pretty mobile and can pickup all the people at one, for me were allways a joke that terrans could do a drop and then the zerlings came and they just pickup and leave, is like cheating (i believe the new protoss recall from the nexus has the same problem btw) because zerg cannot do anything, so the solution is the infestor, but is pretty bad for me that the zerg best anti air is the infested terran, is just... horrible, I will aproach the no stun but root, (you could use abilities) in ground units and slow in flighting units.
I really rooting for the hidra buff in HOTs, but is a new game so we need to balance that stuff also
I couldn't agree with you more. Here's a few of my gripes:
for me were allways a joke that terrans could build a bunker next to my natural hatchery and then the zerlings came and they just repair with scvs, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could kill all my drones with hellions and then the zerlings came and they just kite and leave, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could make buildings and then the zerlings came and they just lift and leave is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terran could send banshees and then the zerlings came and they just keep shooting is like cheating
I think that the easiest and most obvious solution here is to have zerlings shoot air. They got dem strong legs, so it makes sense they can jump and hop onto those medivacs and flying orbital commends.
It'd be best if overlords just spawned banelings instead of dropping creep. To address those problems you mentioned, these banelings should hit nearby airunits upon spawning, so poor Z could handle those mean drops. Make it autocast too, so you can have a nice flying minefield around your bases. Oh and move it from lair-tech to hatch-tech, anything less would be a joke, ofc.
That sounds rather complicated. Why not just let banelings burrow either underground or into the air. Sort of like vikings where they have a vs. land burrow and a vs air borrow.
Zerg doesn't need to be ahead all the time. They can hang around on even or somewhat inferior economy for a while just fine. You need to get ahead in bases at some point, yes. But not all the time.
And yeah, forcing the Roaches, or forcing the lings, or forcing the Spine reroots is good for Terran. That's the whole damn point. If Zerg doesn't use larva for units, the Zerg soars ahead and there's jack the Terran can do about it. Due to the patch Zerg doesn't have to make units with larva unless the Terran does a heavy push which has broken the matchup (and at any rate made it far worse to watch because the super rapid economic expansion of the Zerg and the resulting extremeness of Terran builds has basically erased the midgame completely). The end result is a Terran all-inning, the Terran being ludicrously, unsafely greedy or the Zerg being ahead all game long while remaining safe from almost everything. That dynamic is far, far worse than the old Reactor Hellion meta where there was a middleground and that middle ground was the default for both parties. Greed was actually exciting because it was so unsafe on both players' part, there was a good, long midgame of marine-tank vs. infestor or muta centric zerg comps while Zerg tried to make breathing room to tech up to Tier 3. The matchup was much slower and thus T also had more time to get their lategame tech and production up. It was just a better matchup all around. As a concrete example, in the old meta a 14 minute Hive was astoundingly greedy, and super exciting if it managed to pan out. Now 12 minute is STANDARD. That's so damn wrong it hurts.
On September 03 2012 03:11 Adonminus wrote: Let's not forget that the races function differently. A terran can't spend all his resources on scvs, so he builds scvs while also building units. This means he must somehow use those units in order to stop the droning, and forcing roaches is just so great for him. Roaches is one of the weakest units in combat for ZvT. At the same time zerg cuts drones, and since zerg units are less cost effective even if they are even in everything, the terran will win. Zerg must always be slightly ahead in order to not die. You can't compare it like that.
And I don't see how you can say that Roaches are one of the weakest units in combat for ZvT, a lot of pro Zerg players use Lings/Roaches/Infestors, various timings can be efficiently defended with Lings/Roaches/Banes—not to mention their use against mech. Obviously pure Roach would be terrible against Marines/Tanks but mixing Roaches with Lings/Banes or Lings/Infestors is not unheard of at all.
It depends on the context. Tanks are good in TvP for 1/1/1ing but does that make tanks a good unit in the overall TvP matchup? The only unit youd see less of than the roach ideally in TvZ are hydralisks because they are just blatantly bad Your absolutely right though, roaches can do more in TvZ than the tanks can in TvP atm
I couldn't agree with you more. Here's a few of my gripes:
for me were allways a joke that terrans could build a bunker next to my natural hatchery and then the zerlings came and they just repair with scvs, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could kill all my drones with hellions and then the zerlings came and they just kite and leave, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could make buildings and then the zerlings came and they just lift and leave is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terran could send banshees and then the zerlings came and they just keep shooting is like cheating
I think that the easiest and most obvious solution here is to have zerlings shoot air. They got dem strong legs, so it makes sense they can jump and hop onto those medivacs and flying orbital commends.
Demuslim said on stream, confirmed by personal friend on an NA professional team that Blizz has confirmed to the pro-teams that fungal is being nurfed, changed to a slow instead of a stun. I have no official source obviously becasue they haven't officially released anything about it, but soon my brothers just wait and see, also its somewhere on Demu's vods.
Is this guy just messing with me or can anyone confirm that Demuslim did indeed say that? If so, then FINALLY!
I want to believe.
If this is true: fucking FINALLY!
Name one unit the infestor is not good against. I doubt there is one, maybe the anti-caster unit ghost. The infestor got to keep all its imba shit because it was needed - zergs would just die otherwise. Now zergs seem to do just fine and maybe a bit more. Nerfing the infestor is a much better thing than to change raven speed an acceleration.
The stun basically makes the 9-range, 75 energy aoe instant effect spell able to stack by casting chain fungals. Compare this to the 125 energy, 6-range slow missile HSM. If fungal stuns, then at the very least HSM could be reduced to 100 energy so that a full energy raven can cast 2 missiles. Either this change or a HSM speed buff could be warranted. Faster HSM would make the game harder for the opponents since it would introduce more in-battle micro for splitting your clumped units up. Terran already has to do micro like this vs AOE like storm,fungal or tanks .
But if stun is removed a lot is changed. Maybe then the raven needs no tweaking at all.
The anti-micro spells fungal and forcefields have always made me feel that a big amount of fun is taken out of the game with them. At least terran has semi-good measures vs forcefields with medivac lifts, ghosts, long range tanks and sometimes even thors I am more worried about zergs as their only way of breaking a cast forcefield is with a T3 ultra. I have seen so many games turn into an auto-win for the protoss because the zerg let up the control of a ramp for a second only to have it blocked indefinitely by forcefields.
Frustrating things like these are what makes me enjoy the game less, while it makes less fanatic Sc2 fans stop playing the game completely.
If they removed fungal stun, made forcefields destroyable and tweaked blink so that it requires a unit that is actually on the high ground itself to be able to blink up then Blizzard would have a more fun game to play. Surely high level pros can remedy these things, but for me who is never gonna make even GM it just ruins the fun. I am not kidding, if a protoss scouts your 1 rax expand they will 75% of the time go for 4 gate blink stalker all in. It is insanely hard to hold even if scouted as it is possible to put the observer so that it gives enough vision for blink but is too far away for marines to snipe it.
Demuslim said on stream, confirmed by personal friend on an NA professional team that Blizz has confirmed to the pro-teams that fungal is being nurfed, changed to a slow instead of a stun. I have no official source obviously becasue they haven't officially released anything about it, but soon my brothers just wait and see, also its somewhere on Demu's vods.
Is this guy just messing with me or can anyone confirm that Demuslim did indeed say that? If so, then FINALLY!
Are you sure he didn't mean that it's being considered for HotS? Doesn't sound like something that would go through in WoL if 10% raven speed increase was too extreme. And if all NA teams were informed why would Demuslim need a friend on other team tell him that?
On September 03 2012 01:38 camilocraft wrote: I believe that the maps still need improvements for some balance stuff.
I see the problem of maps vs balance being raised more and more. Personally, I'm of the belief that fixing numbers can fix balance only to a limited extent, while win ratio statistics provide only limited evidence.
I think the problem is that if you tweak the map too much in order to balance a certain match up, then an other match up could be ruined. Like if you get a map with 50-50 winratio for TvZ, then maybe it could make the winrate be 70-30 in TvP, just as an example.
That's true. Another example: the snipe nerf was justified with a minor problem in TvZ late-game. Not a word about the effect on TvP, where it was, at the time, the core part of dealing with zealot/archon compositions, which are simplistic and extremely potent even when simply a-moved as one big ball. This is not to say that Blizzard hadn't tested the nerf out in TvP but it certainly didn't say a word about that match-up.
I believe we should have different maps for different matchups if blizzard can't deal with balance properly.
That might be a way for tournaments that aren't affiliated with Blizzard. Doing so would also make a massive statement that Blizzard would be unable to ignore without taking a PR hit.
If it were to prove that maps dictate a lot, that would beg questions of race design. I have no doubt that balancing three sufficiently non-repetitive races is hard work, also on the conceptual side, not only the analytical number crunching. But part of the problem is the community pressure to act like everything is balanced (which competes with a currently strong trend to speak out and the simple "whining/QQ" has never died).
I'm not sure but part of the problem may be how the game is formulaic, prone to fixed sequential stages, with huge emphasis on counters and responses (he drones hard, I get hellions, he gets roaches, I get tanks, he gets broodlords, I get vikings, he goes ultras). That kind of thing can be difficult to balance properly when the races are so different from each other and the balance isn't symmetrical.
Also with HotS coming up, it will have chaotic balance and everything gonna be unbalanced unless blizzard somehow magically fixes all the abuseful and imbalanced strategies in beta while also having the players achieve a metagame with balanced winrates.
I worry that the metagame may lead to formulaic prescribed builds and sometimes mathematical analyses. Number crunching to detect imbalance and use it to one's favour, then response from the balance team. After that response imba is removed but the balance of other things is upset, leading to the need for more interventions etc. But I am sounding a little too defeatist at this point. Maybe we should all really smile and keep playing.
Though, from my experience and watching tournaments. I saw that mech has a lot of potential in TvZ and I feel that those players who are struggling in TvZ aren't using mech correctly and have suboptimal mech openers. Maybe the terrans really need to just adapt and improve instead of getting buffed.
I'm a fairly low level player but I use a custom mech build that I adapt a lot. TvZ is my best matchup, I think. Not so when I play marine-tank.
About fungal, i believe zerg need something to kill drops without loses if got spoted, something like the scourge, but in WoL they don't have anything aside to the inferstor, they don't have nor cheap nor mobile antiair, the problem with the drops is that the are pretty mobile and can pickup all the people at one, for me were allways a joke that terrans could do a drop and then the zerlings came and they just pickup and leave, is like cheating (i believe the new protoss recall from the nexus has the same problem btw) because zerg cannot do anything, so the solution is the infestor, but is pretty bad for me that the zerg best anti air is the infested terran, is just... horrible, I will aproach the no stun but root, (you could use abilities) in ground units and slow in flighting units.
I really rooting for the hidra buff in HOTs, but is a new game so we need to balance that stuff also
I couldn't agree with you more. Here's a few of my gripes:
for me were allways a joke that terrans could build a bunker next to my natural hatchery and then the zerlings came and they just repair with scvs, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could kill all my drones with hellions and then the zerlings came and they just kite and leave, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could make buildings and then the zerlings came and they just lift and leave is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terran could send banshees and then the zerlings came and they just keep shooting is like cheating
I think that the easiest and most obvious solution here is to have zerlings shoot air. They got dem strong legs, so it makes sense they can jump and hop onto those medivacs and flying orbital commends.
Thank you for the perspective. It's always a good thing to be reminded that one's own race also has strengths that are hard to deal with for the other races and may appear imbalanced from that perspective. But how about using something else than zerglings for some of the tasks you mentioned?
On September 03 2012 01:38 camilocraft wrote: I believe that the maps still need improvements for some balance stuff.
I see the problem of maps vs balance being raised more and more. Personally, I'm of the belief that fixing numbers can fix balance only to a limited extent, while win ratio statistics provide only limited evidence.
I think the problem is that if you tweak the map too much in order to balance a certain match up, then an other match up could be ruined. Like if you get a map with 50-50 winratio for TvZ, then maybe it could make the winrate be 70-30 in TvP, just as an example.
That's true. Another example: the snipe nerf was justified with a minor problem in TvZ late-game. Not a word about the effect on TvP, where it was, at the time, the core part of dealing with zealot/archon compositions, which are simplistic and extremely potent even when simply a-moved as one big ball. This is not to say that Blizzard hadn't tested the nerf out in TvP but it certainly didn't say a word about that match-up.
I believe we should have different maps for different matchups if blizzard can't deal with balance properly.
That might be a way for tournaments that aren't affiliated with Blizzard. Doing so would also make a massive statement that Blizzard would be unable to ignore without taking a PR hit.
If it were to prove that maps dictate a lot, that would beg questions of race design. I have no doubt that balancing three sufficiently non-repetitive races is hard work, also on the conceptual side, not only the analytical number crunching. But part of the problem is the community pressure to act like everything is balanced (which competes with a currently strong trend to speak out and the simple "whining/QQ" has never died).
I'm not sure but part of the problem may be how the game is formulaic, prone to fixed sequential stages, with huge emphasis on counters and responses (he drones hard, I get hellions, he gets roaches, I get tanks, he gets broodlords, I get vikings, he goes ultras). That kind of thing can be difficult to balance properly when the races are so different from each other and the balance isn't symmetrical.
Also with HotS coming up, it will have chaotic balance and everything gonna be unbalanced unless blizzard somehow magically fixes all the abuseful and imbalanced strategies in beta while also having the players achieve a metagame with balanced winrates.
I worry that the metagame may lead to formulaic prescribed builds and sometimes mathematical analyses. Number crunching to detect imbalance and use it to one's favour, then response from the balance team. After that response imba is removed but the balance of other things is upset, leading to the need for more interventions etc. But I am sounding a little too defeatist at this point. Maybe we should all really smile and keep playing.
Though, from my experience and watching tournaments. I saw that mech has a lot of potential in TvZ and I feel that those players who are struggling in TvZ aren't using mech correctly and have suboptimal mech openers. Maybe the terrans really need to just adapt and improve instead of getting buffed.
I'm a fairly low level player but I use a custom mech build that I adapt a lot. TvZ is my best matchup, I think. Not so when I play marine-tank.
About fungal, i believe zerg need something to kill drops without loses if got spoted, something like the scourge, but in WoL they don't have anything aside to the inferstor, they don't have nor cheap nor mobile antiair, the problem with the drops is that the are pretty mobile and can pickup all the people at one, for me were allways a joke that terrans could do a drop and then the zerlings came and they just pickup and leave, is like cheating (i believe the new protoss recall from the nexus has the same problem btw) because zerg cannot do anything, so the solution is the infestor, but is pretty bad for me that the zerg best anti air is the infested terran, is just... horrible, I will aproach the no stun but root, (you could use abilities) in ground units and slow in flighting units.
I really rooting for the hidra buff in HOTs, but is a new game so we need to balance that stuff also
I couldn't agree with you more. Here's a few of my gripes:
for me were allways a joke that terrans could build a bunker next to my natural hatchery and then the zerlings came and they just repair with scvs, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could kill all my drones with hellions and then the zerlings came and they just kite and leave, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could make buildings and then the zerlings came and they just lift and leave is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terran could send banshees and then the zerlings came and they just keep shooting is like cheating
I think that the easiest and most obvious solution here is to have zerlings shoot air. They got dem strong legs, so it makes sense they can jump and hop onto those medivacs and flying orbital commends.
Thank you for the perspective. It's always a good thing to be reminded that one's own race also has strengths that are hard to deal with for the other races and may appear imbalanced from that perspective. But how about using something else than zerglings for some of the tasks you mentioned?
hahahha the zergling part at the end made me laugh so hard :-D
hi guys, sorry for being notorious, but i'd like some votes from the other side of the planet, peace
Poll: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
I am Terran and pick Zerg (89)
42%
I am Zerg and pick Terran (31)
15%
I am Terran and pick Protoss (24)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Zerg (24)
11%
I am Zerg and pick Protoss (23)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Terran (22)
10%
213 total votes
Your vote: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
(Vote): I am Zerg and pick Terran (Vote): I am Zerg and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Terran and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Terran and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Terran
On September 03 2012 04:53 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: hi guys, sorry for being notorious, but i'd like some votes from the other side of the planet, peace
Poll: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
I am Terran and pick Zerg (89)
42%
I am Zerg and pick Terran (31)
15%
I am Terran and pick Protoss (24)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Zerg (24)
11%
I am Zerg and pick Protoss (23)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Terran (22)
10%
213 total votes
Your vote: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
(Vote): I am Zerg and pick Terran (Vote): I am Zerg and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Terran and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Terran and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Terran
On September 03 2012 01:38 camilocraft wrote: I believe that the maps still need improvements for some balance stuff.
I see the problem of maps vs balance being raised more and more. Personally, I'm of the belief that fixing numbers can fix balance only to a limited extent, while win ratio statistics provide only limited evidence.
I think the problem is that if you tweak the map too much in order to balance a certain match up, then an other match up could be ruined. Like if you get a map with 50-50 winratio for TvZ, then maybe it could make the winrate be 70-30 in TvP, just as an example.
That's true. Another example: the snipe nerf was justified with a minor problem in TvZ late-game. Not a word about the effect on TvP, where it was, at the time, the core part of dealing with zealot/archon compositions, which are simplistic and extremely potent even when simply a-moved as one big ball. This is not to say that Blizzard hadn't tested the nerf out in TvP but it certainly didn't say a word about that match-up.
I believe we should have different maps for different matchups if blizzard can't deal with balance properly.
That might be a way for tournaments that aren't affiliated with Blizzard. Doing so would also make a massive statement that Blizzard would be unable to ignore without taking a PR hit.
If it were to prove that maps dictate a lot, that would beg questions of race design. I have no doubt that balancing three sufficiently non-repetitive races is hard work, also on the conceptual side, not only the analytical number crunching. But part of the problem is the community pressure to act like everything is balanced (which competes with a currently strong trend to speak out and the simple "whining/QQ" has never died).
I'm not sure but part of the problem may be how the game is formulaic, prone to fixed sequential stages, with huge emphasis on counters and responses (he drones hard, I get hellions, he gets roaches, I get tanks, he gets broodlords, I get vikings, he goes ultras). That kind of thing can be difficult to balance properly when the races are so different from each other and the balance isn't symmetrical.
Also with HotS coming up, it will have chaotic balance and everything gonna be unbalanced unless blizzard somehow magically fixes all the abuseful and imbalanced strategies in beta while also having the players achieve a metagame with balanced winrates.
I worry that the metagame may lead to formulaic prescribed builds and sometimes mathematical analyses. Number crunching to detect imbalance and use it to one's favour, then response from the balance team. After that response imba is removed but the balance of other things is upset, leading to the need for more interventions etc. But I am sounding a little too defeatist at this point. Maybe we should all really smile and keep playing.
Though, from my experience and watching tournaments. I saw that mech has a lot of potential in TvZ and I feel that those players who are struggling in TvZ aren't using mech correctly and have suboptimal mech openers. Maybe the terrans really need to just adapt and improve instead of getting buffed.
I'm a fairly low level player but I use a custom mech build that I adapt a lot. TvZ is my best matchup, I think. Not so when I play marine-tank.
About fungal, i believe zerg need something to kill drops without loses if got spoted, something like the scourge, but in WoL they don't have anything aside to the inferstor, they don't have nor cheap nor mobile antiair, the problem with the drops is that the are pretty mobile and can pickup all the people at one, for me were allways a joke that terrans could do a drop and then the zerlings came and they just pickup and leave, is like cheating (i believe the new protoss recall from the nexus has the same problem btw) because zerg cannot do anything, so the solution is the infestor, but is pretty bad for me that the zerg best anti air is the infested terran, is just... horrible, I will aproach the no stun but root, (you could use abilities) in ground units and slow in flighting units.
I really rooting for the hidra buff in HOTs, but is a new game so we need to balance that stuff also
I couldn't agree with you more. Here's a few of my gripes:
for me were allways a joke that terrans could build a bunker next to my natural hatchery and then the zerlings came and they just repair with scvs, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could kill all my drones with hellions and then the zerlings came and they just kite and leave, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could make buildings and then the zerlings came and they just lift and leave is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terran could send banshees and then the zerlings came and they just keep shooting is like cheating
I think that the easiest and most obvious solution here is to have zerlings shoot air. They got dem strong legs, so it makes sense they can jump and hop onto those medivacs and flying orbital commends.
Thank you for the perspective. It's always a good thing to be reminded that one's own race also has strengths that are hard to deal with for the other races and may appear imbalanced from that perspective. But how about using something else than zerglings for some of the tasks you mentioned?
As long as they nerf terran im oky with zerg fucking both toss and terran. Terran need some more nerfing in my honest opinion and i am glad they didn't went on with the change, the race dominated way too much for 2 full years.
On September 03 2012 05:23 Aterons_toss wrote: As long as they nerf terran im oky with zerg fucking both toss and terran. Terran need some more nerfing in my honest opinion and i am glad they didn't went on with the change, the race dominated way too much for 2 full years.
On September 03 2012 05:23 Aterons_toss wrote: As long as they nerf terran im oky with zerg fucking both toss and terran. Terran need some more nerfing in my honest opinion and i am glad they didn't went on with the change, the race dominated way too much for 2 full years.
What is imbalanced about terran.....
As you should know, two wrongs usually make a right, and Terran deserves to be horribly UP as compensation for being a bit too good on horrible maps two years ago.
On September 03 2012 04:53 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: hi guys, sorry for being notorious, but i'd like some votes from the other side of the planet, peace
Poll: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
I am Terran and pick Zerg (89)
42%
I am Zerg and pick Terran (31)
15%
I am Terran and pick Protoss (24)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Zerg (24)
11%
I am Zerg and pick Protoss (23)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Terran (22)
10%
213 total votes
Your vote: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
(Vote): I am Zerg and pick Terran (Vote): I am Zerg and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Terran and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Terran and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Terran
where's I'm random and..
I'm Random and I don't play at all. That's the only offrace for Random, right?
In any case, this poll is silly. I'd choose Zerg not because I think Zerg is stronger, but because I've actually got some practice in with Zerg. Hey, Mutas are fun. How much does this say about the balance of TvZ? Nothing at all.
About fungal, i believe zerg need something to kill drops without loses if got spoted, something like the scourge, but in WoL they don't have anything aside to the inferstor, they don't have nor cheap nor mobile antiair, the problem with the drops is that the are pretty mobile and can pickup all the people at one, for me were allways a joke that terrans could do a drop and then the zerlings came and they just pickup and leave, is like cheating (i believe the new protoss recall from the nexus has the same problem btw) because zerg cannot do anything, so the solution is the infestor, but is pretty bad for me that the zerg best anti air is the infested terran, is just... horrible, I will aproach the no stun but root, (you could use abilities) in ground units and slow in flighting units.
I really rooting for the hidra buff in HOTs, but is a new game so we need to balance that stuff also
I couldn't agree with you more. Here's a few of my gripes:
for me were allways a joke that terrans could build a bunker next to my natural hatchery and then the zerlings came and they just repair with scvs, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could kill all my drones with hellions and then the zerlings came and they just kite and leave, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could make buildings and then the zerlings came and they just lift and leave is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terran could send banshees and then the zerlings came and they just keep shooting is like cheating
I think that the easiest and most obvious solution here is to have zerlings shoot air. They got dem strong legs, so it makes sense they can jump and hop onto those medivacs and flying orbital commends.
It'd be best if overlords just spawned banelings instead of dropping creep. To address those problems you mentioned, these banelings should hit nearby airunits upon spawning, so poor Z could handle those mean drops. Make it autocast too, so you can have a nice flying minefield around your bases. Oh and move it from lair-tech to hatch-tech, anything less would be a joke, ofc.
Actually overlords look like old anti-aircraft ballons. It would be funny if they exploded on collision :D.
On September 03 2012 01:38 camilocraft wrote: I believe that the maps still need improvements for some balance stuff.
I see the problem of maps vs balance being raised more and more. Personally, I'm of the belief that fixing numbers can fix balance only to a limited extent, while win ratio statistics provide only limited evidence.
I think the problem is that if you tweak the map too much in order to balance a certain match up, then an other match up could be ruined. Like if you get a map with 50-50 winratio for TvZ, then maybe it could make the winrate be 70-30 in TvP, just as an example.
That's true. Another example: the snipe nerf was justified with a minor problem in TvZ late-game. Not a word about the effect on TvP, where it was, at the time, the core part of dealing with zealot/archon compositions, which are simplistic and extremely potent even when simply a-moved as one big ball. This is not to say that Blizzard hadn't tested the nerf out in TvP but it certainly didn't say a word about that match-up.
I believe we should have different maps for different matchups if blizzard can't deal with balance properly.
That might be a way for tournaments that aren't affiliated with Blizzard. Doing so would also make a massive statement that Blizzard would be unable to ignore without taking a PR hit.
If it were to prove that maps dictate a lot, that would beg questions of race design. I have no doubt that balancing three sufficiently non-repetitive races is hard work, also on the conceptual side, not only the analytical number crunching. But part of the problem is the community pressure to act like everything is balanced (which competes with a currently strong trend to speak out and the simple "whining/QQ" has never died).
I'm not sure but part of the problem may be how the game is formulaic, prone to fixed sequential stages, with huge emphasis on counters and responses (he drones hard, I get hellions, he gets roaches, I get tanks, he gets broodlords, I get vikings, he goes ultras). That kind of thing can be difficult to balance properly when the races are so different from each other and the balance isn't symmetrical.
Also with HotS coming up, it will have chaotic balance and everything gonna be unbalanced unless blizzard somehow magically fixes all the abuseful and imbalanced strategies in beta while also having the players achieve a metagame with balanced winrates.
I worry that the metagame may lead to formulaic prescribed builds and sometimes mathematical analyses. Number crunching to detect imbalance and use it to one's favour, then response from the balance team. After that response imba is removed but the balance of other things is upset, leading to the need for more interventions etc. But I am sounding a little too defeatist at this point. Maybe we should all really smile and keep playing.
Though, from my experience and watching tournaments. I saw that mech has a lot of potential in TvZ and I feel that those players who are struggling in TvZ aren't using mech correctly and have suboptimal mech openers. Maybe the terrans really need to just adapt and improve instead of getting buffed.
I'm a fairly low level player but I use a custom mech build that I adapt a lot. TvZ is my best matchup, I think. Not so when I play marine-tank.
On September 03 2012 02:41 Sein wrote:
On September 03 2012 01:38 camilocraft wrote:
About fungal, i believe zerg need something to kill drops without loses if got spoted, something like the scourge, but in WoL they don't have anything aside to the inferstor, they don't have nor cheap nor mobile antiair, the problem with the drops is that the are pretty mobile and can pickup all the people at one, for me were allways a joke that terrans could do a drop and then the zerlings came and they just pickup and leave, is like cheating (i believe the new protoss recall from the nexus has the same problem btw) because zerg cannot do anything, so the solution is the infestor, but is pretty bad for me that the zerg best anti air is the infested terran, is just... horrible, I will aproach the no stun but root, (you could use abilities) in ground units and slow in flighting units.
I really rooting for the hidra buff in HOTs, but is a new game so we need to balance that stuff also
I couldn't agree with you more. Here's a few of my gripes:
for me were allways a joke that terrans could build a bunker next to my natural hatchery and then the zerlings came and they just repair with scvs, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could kill all my drones with hellions and then the zerlings came and they just kite and leave, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could make buildings and then the zerlings came and they just lift and leave is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terran could send banshees and then the zerlings came and they just keep shooting is like cheating
I think that the easiest and most obvious solution here is to have zerlings shoot air. They got dem strong legs, so it makes sense they can jump and hop onto those medivacs and flying orbital commends.
Thank you for the perspective. It's always a good thing to be reminded that one's own race also has strengths that are hard to deal with for the other races and may appear imbalanced from that perspective. But how about using something else than zerglings for some of the tasks you mentioned?
Snipe nerf was completely irrelevant for tvp.
Wrong, it helped to use Snipe on Zealots after High Templars had been taken care of.
On September 03 2012 01:38 camilocraft wrote: I believe that the maps still need improvements for some balance stuff.
I see the problem of maps vs balance being raised more and more. Personally, I'm of the belief that fixing numbers can fix balance only to a limited extent, while win ratio statistics provide only limited evidence.
I think the problem is that if you tweak the map too much in order to balance a certain match up, then an other match up could be ruined. Like if you get a map with 50-50 winratio for TvZ, then maybe it could make the winrate be 70-30 in TvP, just as an example.
That's true. Another example: the snipe nerf was justified with a minor problem in TvZ late-game. Not a word about the effect on TvP, where it was, at the time, the core part of dealing with zealot/archon compositions, which are simplistic and extremely potent even when simply a-moved as one big ball. This is not to say that Blizzard hadn't tested the nerf out in TvP but it certainly didn't say a word about that match-up.
I believe we should have different maps for different matchups if blizzard can't deal with balance properly.
That might be a way for tournaments that aren't affiliated with Blizzard. Doing so would also make a massive statement that Blizzard would be unable to ignore without taking a PR hit.
If it were to prove that maps dictate a lot, that would beg questions of race design. I have no doubt that balancing three sufficiently non-repetitive races is hard work, also on the conceptual side, not only the analytical number crunching. But part of the problem is the community pressure to act like everything is balanced (which competes with a currently strong trend to speak out and the simple "whining/QQ" has never died).
I'm not sure but part of the problem may be how the game is formulaic, prone to fixed sequential stages, with huge emphasis on counters and responses (he drones hard, I get hellions, he gets roaches, I get tanks, he gets broodlords, I get vikings, he goes ultras). That kind of thing can be difficult to balance properly when the races are so different from each other and the balance isn't symmetrical.
Also with HotS coming up, it will have chaotic balance and everything gonna be unbalanced unless blizzard somehow magically fixes all the abuseful and imbalanced strategies in beta while also having the players achieve a metagame with balanced winrates.
I worry that the metagame may lead to formulaic prescribed builds and sometimes mathematical analyses. Number crunching to detect imbalance and use it to one's favour, then response from the balance team. After that response imba is removed but the balance of other things is upset, leading to the need for more interventions etc. But I am sounding a little too defeatist at this point. Maybe we should all really smile and keep playing.
Though, from my experience and watching tournaments. I saw that mech has a lot of potential in TvZ and I feel that those players who are struggling in TvZ aren't using mech correctly and have suboptimal mech openers. Maybe the terrans really need to just adapt and improve instead of getting buffed.
I'm a fairly low level player but I use a custom mech build that I adapt a lot. TvZ is my best matchup, I think. Not so when I play marine-tank.
On September 03 2012 02:41 Sein wrote:
On September 03 2012 01:38 camilocraft wrote:
About fungal, i believe zerg need something to kill drops without loses if got spoted, something like the scourge, but in WoL they don't have anything aside to the inferstor, they don't have nor cheap nor mobile antiair, the problem with the drops is that the are pretty mobile and can pickup all the people at one, for me were allways a joke that terrans could do a drop and then the zerlings came and they just pickup and leave, is like cheating (i believe the new protoss recall from the nexus has the same problem btw) because zerg cannot do anything, so the solution is the infestor, but is pretty bad for me that the zerg best anti air is the infested terran, is just... horrible, I will aproach the no stun but root, (you could use abilities) in ground units and slow in flighting units.
I really rooting for the hidra buff in HOTs, but is a new game so we need to balance that stuff also
I couldn't agree with you more. Here's a few of my gripes:
for me were allways a joke that terrans could build a bunker next to my natural hatchery and then the zerlings came and they just repair with scvs, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could kill all my drones with hellions and then the zerlings came and they just kite and leave, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could make buildings and then the zerlings came and they just lift and leave is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terran could send banshees and then the zerlings came and they just keep shooting is like cheating
I think that the easiest and most obvious solution here is to have zerlings shoot air. They got dem strong legs, so it makes sense they can jump and hop onto those medivacs and flying orbital commends.
Thank you for the perspective. It's always a good thing to be reminded that one's own race also has strengths that are hard to deal with for the other races and may appear imbalanced from that perspective. But how about using something else than zerglings for some of the tasks you mentioned?
Snipe nerf was completely irrelevant for tvp.
Wrong, it helped to use Snipe on Zealots after High Templars had been taken care of.
This is one of those situations where Terrans just made use of what they had. It's the equivalent of morphing HTs into archons after being EMPd. The hope is that, by doing something instead of nothing, you'll change the tide of battle. It's not because they think it is THE way to counter the army.
We feel that at this time, we should give players more opportunities to fully explore the slowly-shifting meta-game before we change the balance of the game.
Wish they just did this all the time.. players, most of the time will figure out ways to deal with any problems and on some occasions Blizzard should have just waited longer before making changes
The maps alone are a huge improvement. We should focus on making better maps and keep the balance changes off the table for a while.
Almost every single tournament has maps like Daybreak which is 61:39 % in favor of zerg (according to TL database). To illustrate, that is basically the same thing as Steppes of War (which was 62% T favored)
We also have big and turtle friendly maps that prevent almost any aggression and make all matchups 10min turtle-feasts. That is basically equally bad as having only rush maps in the map pool.
So maps being good or bad is very subjective thing.
On September 03 2012 04:53 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: hi guys, sorry for being notorious, but i'd like some votes from the other side of the planet, peace
Poll: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
I am Terran and pick Zerg (89)
42%
I am Zerg and pick Terran (31)
15%
I am Terran and pick Protoss (24)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Zerg (24)
11%
I am Zerg and pick Protoss (23)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Terran (22)
10%
213 total votes
Your vote: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
(Vote): I am Zerg and pick Terran (Vote): I am Zerg and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Terran and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Terran and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Terran
where's I'm random and..
Well, 75% of the Terrans would choose Zerg... I knew that before the poll.
And yeah David Kim must be blind or something when he says there something balanced in IEM... there where Bomber and MVP, 2 top tier terrans vs. some foreign Zerg... MVP won this because he is a way better player than Nerchio, slivko or vortix.
Blizzard should really think about if David Kim is the right person für this job.
I wish David Kim would just open his eyes. It's clear to everyone that zerg is slightly stronger than both terran and protoss in the late game, (most of protoss wins that make the matchup balanced are from 2 base all ins). The matchups are now boring and stale, its just fast tech to greater spire and infestors for both zerg matchups and fungal somewhat effectively for the win. Spreading broodlords for the vortex is not hard, and build corruptors for vikings. The meta game is in a dire state at the moment.
We feel that at this time, we should give players more opportunities to fully explore the slowly-shifting meta-game before we change the balance of the game.
Wish they just did this all the time.. players, most of the time will figure out ways to deal with any problems and on some occasions Blizzard should have just waited longer before making changes
The maps alone are a huge improvement. We should focus on making better maps and keep the balance changes off the table for a while.
Almost every single tournament has maps like Daybreak which is 61:39 % in favor of zerg (according to TL database). To illustrate, that is basically the same thing as Steppes of War (which was 62% T favored)
We also have big and turtle friendly maps that prevent almost any aggression and make all matchups 10min turtle-feasts. That is basically equally bad as having only rush maps in the map pool.
So maps being good or bad is very subjective thing.
In that sense, good and bad maps are actually objective. You gave a very clear, measurable criteria to claim if a map was good or bad, the winrate. If the role of a map is to create a balanced arena for all matchups, Daybreak is just as bad as Steppes of War.
We feel that at this time, we should give players more opportunities to fully explore the slowly-shifting meta-game before we change the balance of the game.
Wish they just did this all the time.. players, most of the time will figure out ways to deal with any problems and on some occasions Blizzard should have just waited longer before making changes
The maps alone are a huge improvement. We should focus on making better maps and keep the balance changes off the table for a while.
Almost every single tournament has maps like Daybreak which is 61:39 % in favor of zerg (according to TL database). To illustrate, that is basically the same thing as Steppes of War (which was 62% T favored)
We also have big and turtle friendly maps that prevent almost any aggression and make all matchups 10min turtle-feasts. That is basically equally bad as having only rush maps in the map pool.
So maps being good or bad is very subjective thing.
In that sense, good and bad maps are actually objective. You gave a very clear, measurable criteria to claim if a map was good or bad, the winrate. If the role of a map is to create a balanced arena for all matchups, Daybreak is just as bad as Steppes of War.
Well yes, it would be objective if those principles would apply. But for some reason, most people would say maps like Daybreak or Metropolis are much better than Steppes of War. Only difference is that Steppes favored terran and rushing and Metropolis favors zerg and long passive games into 200/200 fights.
This is one of the biggest problems in Sc2. Criteria is never standard and double principles always show up. There are also examples of this in how Blizzard approaches balance issues. The more Blizzard interviews I read, the more I'm convinced that they don't have a developed criteria for balancing the game.
Sometimes it is tournament win rates, sometimes it is 1 tournament, sometimes it is even 1 player/particular game, sometimes is race representation, ladder, or how much actual tournament wins a particular race has, sometimes changes are applied after 1 weekend of tournament play, sometimes they wait for months, they don't factor in map balance into overall balance etc.
If you don't have a constant, how will you know you aren't just running in circles?
On September 03 2012 04:53 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: hi guys, sorry for being notorious, but i'd like some votes from the other side of the planet, peace
Poll: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
I am Terran and pick Zerg (89)
42%
I am Zerg and pick Terran (31)
15%
I am Terran and pick Protoss (24)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Zerg (24)
11%
I am Zerg and pick Protoss (23)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Terran (22)
10%
213 total votes
Your vote: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
(Vote): I am Zerg and pick Terran (Vote): I am Zerg and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Terran and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Terran and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Terran
where's I'm random and..
Well, 75% of the Terrans would choose Zerg... I knew that before the poll.
And yeah David Kim must be blind or something when he says there something balanced in IEM... there where Bomber and MVP, 2 top tier terrans vs. some foreign Zerg... MVP won this because he is a way better player than Nerchio, slivko or vortix.
Blizzard should really think about if David Kim is the right person für this job.
I guess I'm in the minority, I voted: I'm protoss and I would play terran as offrace.
They still haven't addressed the lag spikes that come from the last patch. Ever since the new bnet makeover patch, I get lag spikes when battles start. It makes FF's absolutely useless. All the protoss matchups DEPEND on FF in the early game. When I get a lag spike just as a battle starts, the game basically freezes, 2 seconds go by in game, and when it unfreezes their army is on top of mine. I have completely stopped laddering because of it. It's been way too long, this patch should never have been released in it's current state, and this should have been fixed or reverted weeks ago. This is absolutely pathetic and I have no intention of buying HOTS if this is the kind of shit they are releasing.
To be clear, this NEVER happened until last patch.
On September 03 2012 04:53 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: hi guys, sorry for being notorious, but i'd like some votes from the other side of the planet, peace
Poll: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
I am Terran and pick Zerg (89)
42%
I am Zerg and pick Terran (31)
15%
I am Terran and pick Protoss (24)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Zerg (24)
11%
I am Zerg and pick Protoss (23)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Terran (22)
10%
213 total votes
Your vote: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
(Vote): I am Zerg and pick Terran (Vote): I am Zerg and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Terran and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Terran and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Terran
where's I'm random and..
Well, 75% of the Terrans would choose Zerg... I knew that before the poll.
And yeah David Kim must be blind or something when he says there something balanced in IEM... there where Bomber and MVP, 2 top tier terrans vs. some foreign Zerg... MVP won this because he is a way better player than Nerchio, slivko or vortix.
Blizzard should really think about if David Kim is the right person für this job.
I guess I'm in the minority, I voted: I'm protoss and I would play terran as offrace.
I'm Terran and I picked Protoss as offrace. The biggest reason I don't switch already is because pretty much all of my friends play Protoss, and I don't want to be forced to play so much PvP every day.
On September 03 2012 01:38 camilocraft wrote: I believe that the maps still need improvements for some balance stuff.
I see the problem of maps vs balance being raised more and more. Personally, I'm of the belief that fixing numbers can fix balance only to a limited extent, while win ratio statistics provide only limited evidence.
I think the problem is that if you tweak the map too much in order to balance a certain match up, then an other match up could be ruined. Like if you get a map with 50-50 winratio for TvZ, then maybe it could make the winrate be 70-30 in TvP, just as an example.
That's true. Another example: the snipe nerf was justified with a minor problem in TvZ late-game. Not a word about the effect on TvP, where it was, at the time, the core part of dealing with zealot/archon compositions, which are simplistic and extremely potent even when simply a-moved as one big ball. This is not to say that Blizzard hadn't tested the nerf out in TvP but it certainly didn't say a word about that match-up.
I believe we should have different maps for different matchups if blizzard can't deal with balance properly.
That might be a way for tournaments that aren't affiliated with Blizzard. Doing so would also make a massive statement that Blizzard would be unable to ignore without taking a PR hit.
If it were to prove that maps dictate a lot, that would beg questions of race design. I have no doubt that balancing three sufficiently non-repetitive races is hard work, also on the conceptual side, not only the analytical number crunching. But part of the problem is the community pressure to act like everything is balanced (which competes with a currently strong trend to speak out and the simple "whining/QQ" has never died).
I'm not sure but part of the problem may be how the game is formulaic, prone to fixed sequential stages, with huge emphasis on counters and responses (he drones hard, I get hellions, he gets roaches, I get tanks, he gets broodlords, I get vikings, he goes ultras). That kind of thing can be difficult to balance properly when the races are so different from each other and the balance isn't symmetrical.
Also with HotS coming up, it will have chaotic balance and everything gonna be unbalanced unless blizzard somehow magically fixes all the abuseful and imbalanced strategies in beta while also having the players achieve a metagame with balanced winrates.
I worry that the metagame may lead to formulaic prescribed builds and sometimes mathematical analyses. Number crunching to detect imbalance and use it to one's favour, then response from the balance team. After that response imba is removed but the balance of other things is upset, leading to the need for more interventions etc. But I am sounding a little too defeatist at this point. Maybe we should all really smile and keep playing.
Though, from my experience and watching tournaments. I saw that mech has a lot of potential in TvZ and I feel that those players who are struggling in TvZ aren't using mech correctly and have suboptimal mech openers. Maybe the terrans really need to just adapt and improve instead of getting buffed.
I'm a fairly low level player but I use a custom mech build that I adapt a lot. TvZ is my best matchup, I think. Not so when I play marine-tank.
About fungal, i believe zerg need something to kill drops without loses if got spoted, something like the scourge, but in WoL they don't have anything aside to the inferstor, they don't have nor cheap nor mobile antiair, the problem with the drops is that the are pretty mobile and can pickup all the people at one, for me were allways a joke that terrans could do a drop and then the zerlings came and they just pickup and leave, is like cheating (i believe the new protoss recall from the nexus has the same problem btw) because zerg cannot do anything, so the solution is the infestor, but is pretty bad for me that the zerg best anti air is the infested terran, is just... horrible, I will aproach the no stun but root, (you could use abilities) in ground units and slow in flighting units.
I really rooting for the hidra buff in HOTs, but is a new game so we need to balance that stuff also
I couldn't agree with you more. Here's a few of my gripes:
for me were allways a joke that terrans could build a bunker next to my natural hatchery and then the zerlings came and they just repair with scvs, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could kill all my drones with hellions and then the zerlings came and they just kite and leave, is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terrans could make buildings and then the zerlings came and they just lift and leave is like cheating
for me were allways a joke that terran could send banshees and then the zerlings came and they just keep shooting is like cheating
I think that the easiest and most obvious solution here is to have zerlings shoot air. They got dem strong legs, so it makes sense they can jump and hop onto those medivacs and flying orbital commends.
Thank you for the perspective. It's always a good thing to be reminded that one's own race also has strengths that are hard to deal with for the other races and may appear imbalanced from that perspective. But how about using something else than zerglings for some of the tasks you mentioned?
On September 03 2012 04:53 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: hi guys, sorry for being notorious, but i'd like some votes from the other side of the planet, peace
Poll: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
I am Terran and pick Zerg (89)
42%
I am Zerg and pick Terran (31)
15%
I am Terran and pick Protoss (24)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Zerg (24)
11%
I am Zerg and pick Protoss (23)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Terran (22)
10%
213 total votes
Your vote: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
(Vote): I am Zerg and pick Terran (Vote): I am Zerg and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Terran and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Terran and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Terran
where's I'm random and..
Well, 75% of the Terrans would choose Zerg... I knew that before the poll.
And yeah David Kim must be blind or something when he says there something balanced in IEM... there where Bomber and MVP, 2 top tier terrans vs. some foreign Zerg... MVP won this because he is a way better player than Nerchio, slivko or vortix.
Blizzard should really think about if David Kim is the right person für this job.
and 62 % of zergs would choose Terran ^^ that's funny. I assume the terran % would be somewhat lower if i would not collect data in a terran qq thread ..
Poll: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
I am Terran and pick Zerg (89)
42%
I am Zerg and pick Terran (31)
15%
I am Terran and pick Protoss (24)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Zerg (24)
11%
I am Zerg and pick Protoss (23)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Terran (22)
10%
213 total votes
Your vote: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
(Vote): I am Zerg and pick Terran (Vote): I am Zerg and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Terran and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Terran and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Terran
On September 03 2012 04:02 NewbieOne wrote: That might be a way for tournaments that aren't affiliated with Blizzard. Doing so would also make a massive statement that Blizzard would be unable to ignore without taking a PR hit.
If it were to prove that maps dictate a lot, that would beg questions of race design.
I'd say maps dictating a lot is already proven, especially for Protoss (in particular because of the interaction between Sentries and chokes).
Want to basically force Protoss into 2-bases all-ins 9 times out of 10 in PvZ? Meet Dual Sight and other maps with wide open thirds. Want to prevent Protoss from going FFE? Meet XNC and other maps with wide open naturals. Want to make it difficult for Protoss to defend 3 bases successfully? Increase the distance between main and third. (In TvX match-ups this would also lead to the third being a PF.) Want to make it easier for Protoss to defend 3 bases successfully? Meet Cloud Kingdom or Entombed Valley. Want to make early agressive play standard for Terran? Make maps with short distance so that 2 rax becomes stronger. Want to promote 3-bases turtle play? Meet Calm before the Storm. Etc., etc.
Map design and spawns allow/prevent some kinds of play on their own. Even neutral Supply Depot at the bottom of the ramp leading to the natural in tournament maps is a map feature preventing some strategies. Tons and tons of things in the game come down to maps. The problem with the current map pool is that for instance lategame TvZ on Antiga and lategame TvZ on Metropolis basically have nothing in common, yet units still have the same values. Basically you have the same tools on paper but maps allow or prevent you from reaching and using them.
On September 03 2012 04:02 NewbieOne wrote: That might be a way for tournaments that aren't affiliated with Blizzard. Doing so would also make a massive statement that Blizzard would be unable to ignore without taking a PR hit.
If it were to prove that maps dictate a lot, that would beg questions of race design.
I'd say maps dictating a lot is already proven, especially for Protoss (in particular because of the interaction between Sentries and chokes).
Want to basically force Protoss into 2-bases all-ins 9 times out of 10 in PvZ? Meet Dual Sight and other maps with wide open thirds. Want to prevent Protoss from going FFE? Meet XNC and other maps with wide open naturals. Want to make it difficult for Protoss to defend 3 bases successfully? Increase the distance between main and third. (In TvX match-ups this would also lead to the third being a PF.) Want to make it easier for Protoss to defend 3 bases successfully? Meet Cloud Kingdom or Entombed Valley. Want to make early agressive play standard for Terran? Make maps with short distance so that 2 rax becomes stronger. Want to promote 3-bases turtle play? Meet Calm before the Storm. Etc., etc.
Map design and spawns allow/prevent some kinds of play on their own. Even neutral Supply Depot at the bottom of the ramp leading to the natural in tournament maps is a map feature preventing some strategies. Tons and tons of things in the game come down to maps. The problem with the current map pool is that for instance lategame TvZ on Antiga and lategame TvZ on Metropolis basically have nothing in common, yet units still have the same values. Basically you have the same tools on paper but maps allow or prevent you from reaching and using them.
Agreed. The relative strength of protoss 2 base all ins vs zerg are heavily dependant on the map as well. On daybreak for example, you can ff the ramp from the natural with a sentry/immortal all in to the 3rd with 3 ff's, which guarantees a third base kill and chance to retreat. Compare that with a map like ohana, and the journey from the main to the natural for zerg is only marginally longer (assuming it's connected by creep),
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
Yup, this is exactly how Blizzard balances this game. They just look at tournament results see which race is winning and stop them from winning.
-_-
Then you don't understand balance.
If Zerg was OP, then those inferior Zergs would smash MvP or be on even footing. Except they were dominated, stop crying.
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
Yup, this is exactly how Blizzard balances this game. They just look at tournament results see which race is winning and stop them from winning.
-_-
Then you don't understand balance.
If Zerg was OP, then those inferior Zergs would smash MvP or be on even footing. Except they were dominated, stop crying.
you dont understant the definition of being op
being op means that both are on the same skill level and the op race wins most of the time
mvp is a code s champion that plays 2 or 3 leauges higher then this zerg it is already a shame that he had a hard time vs them to be honest i was live there and the zergs dont played well
imo they could won if they played a little bit better btw 3 zerg 1 a kor terran show how strong zerg is
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
Yup, this is exactly how Blizzard balances this game. They just look at tournament results see which race is winning and stop them from winning.
-_-
Then you don't understand balance.
If Zerg was OP, then those inferior Zergs would smash MvP or be on even footing. Except they were dominated, stop crying.
Vortix was dominated by Supernova and forGG?
Also pretty funny that a couple days after a Zerg wins MLG David Kim posts this. And most of the games with ravens came on Metropolis, a map not even in the pool, ffs.
I know that the game should be balanced at the highest levels, but for top 200 masters and even some grandmasters terran feels so damn weak. I don't have the time to practice 10 hours a day..
On September 03 2012 07:55 Snowbear wrote: I know that the game should be balanced at the highest levels, but for top 200 masters and even some grandmasters terran feels so damn weak. I don't have the time to practice 10 hours a day..
Good news, the Zergs you are facing are less skilled than Taeja's or Mvp's opponents. Don't assume you need to play as good as best terran players.
On September 03 2012 07:55 Snowbear wrote: I know that the game should be balanced at the highest levels, but for top 200 masters and even some grandmasters terran feels so damn weak. I don't have the time to practice 10 hours a day..
Good news, the Zergs you are facing are less skilled than Taeja's or Mvp's opponents. Don't assume you need to play as good as best terran players.
If the zerg players has the same amount of talent then me, and puts the same amount of hours into the game, then the zerg will win, because he has an easier time, and that's what bothers me.
Or is it hard to copy pros like nestea and 1a your ball into the opponent? As zerg there are 3 hard things: injects, droning and drop defense. Once you mastered that, you have a much easier time then the terran. The terran needs to macro, micro, multatask...
I know this is mostly about tvz, but does anyone else besides me think although the pvz matchup results are balacned, most of the protoss wins are from p 2 base all ins. I haven't watched any Korean games lately, so I'm going mostly off foreign tournaments and it's been rare for a protoss to win in the late game. Is it evidence that the zerg late game army is too strong? Or is it okay for a matchup to be governed by 2 base all ins?
On September 03 2012 07:55 Snowbear wrote: I know that the game should be balanced at the highest levels, but for top 200 masters and even some grandmasters terran feels so damn weak. I don't have the time to practice 10 hours a day..
Good news, the Zergs you are facing are less skilled than Taeja's or Mvp's opponents. Don't assume you need to play as good as best terran players.
If the zerg players has the same amount of talent then me, and puts the same amount of hours into the game, then the zerg will win, because he has an easier time, and that's what bothers me.
You have absolutely no objective evidence of that.
You should trust Blizzard a little bit because it's not your job to balance the game, and Zerg was by far the worst race for a long time (first year of Wing of Liberty), another good news for you : Heart of the Swarm is coming soon, and the balance will completely change. You won't have to wait as long as the Zerg players to have issues fixed with your race.
On September 03 2012 06:42 Reborn8u wrote: They still haven't addressed the lag spikes that come from the last patch. Ever since the new bnet makeover patch, I get lag spikes when battles start. It makes FF's absolutely useless. All the protoss matchups DEPEND on FF in the early game. When I get a lag spike just as a battle starts, the game basically freezes, 2 seconds go by in game, and when it unfreezes their army is on top of mine. I have completely stopped laddering because of it. It's been way too long, this patch should never have been released in it's current state, and this should have been fixed or reverted weeks ago. This is absolutely pathetic and I have no intention of buying HOTS if this is the kind of shit they are releasing.
To be clear, this NEVER happened until last patch.
Important Information: UPDATE • We have seen several reports regarding stuttering and other performance issues. We identified several performance issues with the release of 1.5 but have not been able to identify the exact cause. With 1.5.2 we added more performance tracking to the game to hopefully find a solution.
On September 03 2012 04:53 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: hi guys, sorry for being notorious, but i'd like some votes from the other side of the planet, peace
Poll: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
I am Terran and pick Zerg (89)
42%
I am Zerg and pick Terran (31)
15%
I am Terran and pick Protoss (24)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Zerg (24)
11%
I am Zerg and pick Protoss (23)
11%
I am Protoss and pick Terran (22)
10%
213 total votes
Your vote: if you had to play in an offrace tournament, which race would you pick
(Vote): I am Zerg and pick Terran (Vote): I am Zerg and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Terran and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Terran and pick Protoss (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Zerg (Vote): I am Protoss and pick Terran
where's I'm random and..
Well, 75% of the Terrans would choose Zerg... I knew that before the poll.
And yeah David Kim must be blind or something when he says there something balanced in IEM... there where Bomber and MVP, 2 top tier terrans vs. some foreign Zerg... MVP won this because he is a way better player than Nerchio, slivko or vortix.
Blizzard should really think about if David Kim is the right person für this job.
I guess I'm in the minority, I voted: I'm protoss and I would play terran as offrace.
Me too, I feel the skillsets are a bit more transferable and good for improving your play. Plus microing bio is a joy when you're used to the Protoss style. My Terran actually got to near the same MMR as my Toss before patch 1.5 broke the game for me.
Zerg just feels weird to me, choosing to drone or build attacking units is just a kind of alien concept for me.
On September 03 2012 08:04 Tao367 wrote: I know this is mostly about tvz, but does anyone else besides me think although the pvz matchup results are balacned, most of the protoss wins are from p 2 base all ins. I haven't watched any Korean games lately, so I'm going mostly off foreign tournaments and it's been rare for a protoss to win in the late game. Is it evidence that the zerg late game army is too strong? Or is it okay for a matchup to be governed by 2 base all ins?
Outside of the occasional HerO game, or Ace vs BboongBbong [sic] it's a trend I've noticed for a while, and it's really boring
On a plus note, high level TvP is actually a pretty good matchup for the spectator of late, at least I find this. That or I'm still revelling in the glory of Supernova's comeback against Creator
All joking aside, the changes are minor and I expect that things will remain relativly static outside of any potential strategic innovations (as it should be).
When I've just lost a close macro game and I have 4k gas banked I never go "Man I wish Id made more ravens!" IMO ravens will never be the cost efficient gas dump that terran needs. Ghosts used to fill that role pre-nerf, but ravens seriously don't cut it.
MY problem with ravens is that they require two different upgrades, on top of a substantial energy wait-time, to be useful for anything but killing creep. I want to launch those awesome seeker missles but I have yet to find a solid build that transitions out of mid-game into ravens, without sacrificing either map control or economy.
Does anyone else feel like Terran got screwed over in their Tier 3 units?
And to all the haters in this thread; post something constructive or insightful or gtfo. Nobody wants to read your stupid, poorly-written one liners and puns. Go back to reddit
I'm really just a whiny terran and don't really understand anything. But I got a few questions 1) Why does DKim/Blizz team make the changes so drastic (thinking for instance snipe with ghosts). I mean is there a big problem with adding like 5 hitpoints to something or 1 range. 2) Are terrans complaining about fungal growth (I think this is the real problem zvt btw)? I really hate watching sht get fungaled over and over. I mean after the first fungal it takes minimal skillz to repeat fungal a bunch of units to death. Personally I think there should be a cool down for fungaled units... so they can run/snipe infestas; think that would make for some nice micro situations. Compare fungal to emp/storm, these spells don't necessarily bone a bunch of opposing units. 3) Why don't pro-terrans pop one raven before starporting medievacs (especially with that reactor hellions, cloaked banshee). Seems to me terran should use an early game raven with their map-control hellion force. Or does this completely f the build order into rine/tank. Discuss this sht plz.
I was looking forward to the curbing of zerg's insane creep spread and a long awaited raven buff and yet based on a single tournament where (IMO) the winning terrans outplayed the losing zergs they're retracting everything...
-_-
I have seen many pro games where terrans try ravens, i have done it myself, i have yet to see why they should be our saving grace. Ravens have a single major asset; they're extremely supply efficient, nearly as supply efficient as infestors. That being said, they're not as cost effecient IMO.
In spite of raising hopes and winrates i have to continue throwing this fact out there:
Seeker Missile has 6 range. Fungal growth has 9 range with radius 2.0
It is a fact that ravens are outranged by a full 5 from infestors. In addition they're slower when infestor are on creep and the HSM can be dodged if the infestor has a head start. By this measure there should be very few if any situations where a infestor is beaten by ravens.
IDK. It's a very frustrating match up which is made more so from the retraction of a hopeful buff to an underused unit, it's made worse that they seem to not even address creep either.\
I had to switch to league of legends to have a fun game expereience anymore, beating a zerg or a protoss who KNOWS what they are doing (key point here) just DOES NOT HAPPEN. ever. unless you are just flat out way better than them..like mvp vs random foreigner patchzergs who still gives him trouble rofl.
As a terran buff: Ravens could use -10 build time and maybe a slightly stronger auto turret, pretty much anything else breaks a lot of things. As a zerg nerf: A model size reduction on infestors to make them more susceptible to emp or movement speed reduction would make a huge difference as well. I highly doubt they would touch dmg or casting range.
On September 03 2012 15:29 Doko wrote: As a terran buff: Ravens could use -10 build time and maybe a slightly stronger auto turret, pretty much anything else breaks a lot of things. As a zerg nerf: A model size reduction on infestors to make them more susceptible to emp or movement speed reduction would make a huge difference as well. I highly doubt they would touch dmg or casting range.
Raven build time would be awesome.
I build many of them yet wonder where the fuck they are all the time. Answer: still in production. -_-
I have come to use Ravens in late game situations. But the situations where you can safely field them are very few.
I can only bring them out when I split the map in TvZ when I have a couple to a few PF's at key chokes, or when I'm pretty much ahead or when I know there's no imminent attack coming. <-All of these mean I'm pretty much ahead and I'm just looking for something to deliver the final blow safely.
To those suggesting that we get Ravens sooner. It cuts severely into upgrades and other Gas Intensive units - Ghosts/Medivacs/Tanks.
I've gotten Ravens quickly a few time while I was taking my third, and I end up getting wrecked while my SM is researching or Ravens are waiting for energy. The 125 energy requirement for Ravens is just ridiculous, especially when their range is so limited. It's a very high-risk investment in mid-game situations without a guaranteed payoff.
On September 01 2012 01:49 [F_]aths wrote: I am amazed how many guys think when they don't agree with Blizzard's stance, that Blizzard is wrong.
This.
All the people complaining that because of MVP it's harder for other terrans..... I thought everyone was interested in the game being balanced at the very top level? I remember complaints because of patches where they made matchups more balanced in the bronze/silver league area, but you guys complain when they don't do it for low/mid masters?
MVP raised the bar, you follow suit or you fall behind, this has been the way for every race. Just be happy you have someone to copy/look up to. Zerg didn't have this for a while when they were losing, and neither did protoss.
It is because Blizzard really hates Terrans. They love Protoss and Zerg, but prefer Zerg more. That is why they want to destroy a race they have designed in order to make the game more boring. Really?
On September 03 2012 18:25 papalion wrote: It is because Blizzard really hates Terrans. They love Protoss and Zerg, but prefer Zerg more. That is why they want to destroy a race they have designed in order to make the game more boring. Really?
Yes that's obviously exactly their intentions, they don't care, they lost their passion! Also nice first post.
I think this is the right call and I am not a zerg player. I think the game is quite balanced, but...it is pretty boring to watch at this point. I do think the micro skillcap is different for zerg and terran/toss.
What I mean is, for zerg there is not as much gain in microing the basic units. If you compare it to marine or zealot/stalker/sentry micro it is just...well...sad . Hell, I noticed quite a couple of euro zergs in tournaments 1a-ing their single control group army and still doing quite alright :s.
It might be a design choice considering the zerg also need to spend quite some time on injects and creep, but I think that is just a bad design choice. I don't get excited when someone wins because he has good injects or spreads a lot of creep, and knows how to rush up the tech tree. That should not be enough to do good at tournaments, but maybe that is just me. So I hope the expansion gives zergs something better to play with in that regard.
I just dont understand why it's so hard to make the raven as sick great as the infestor. It's not that they are free or something... I would make the missile 75 energy and no upgrades needed. Maybe then zergs will start splitting units?
On September 03 2012 19:01 Snowbear wrote: I just dont understand why it's so hard to make the raven as sick great as the infestor. It's not that they are free or something... I would make the missile 75 energy and no upgrades needed. Maybe then zergs will start splitting units?
On September 03 2012 19:01 Snowbear wrote: I just dont understand why it's so hard to make the raven as sick great as the infestor. It's not that they are free or something... I would make the missile 75 energy and no upgrades needed. Maybe then zergs will start splitting units?
I really hope you are kididng here. The reason infestors are so strong is because they are backbone of the zerg army. When the raven reached that kind of importance you might consider your buff.
On September 03 2012 19:01 Snowbear wrote: I just dont understand why it's so hard to make the raven as sick great as the infestor. It's not that they are free or something... I would make the missile 75 energy and no upgrades needed. Maybe then zergs will start splitting units?
I really hope you are kididng here. The reason infestors are so strong is because they are backbone of the zerg army. When the raven reached that kind of importance you might consider your buff.
Medivacs and tanks are the backbone of the terran army. When I make ravens, I put gas in ravens, not in tanks or medivacs, so ravens become the backbone of my army.
On September 03 2012 19:01 Snowbear wrote: I just dont understand why it's so hard to make the raven as sick great as the infestor. It's not that they are free or something... I would make the missile 75 energy and no upgrades needed. Maybe then zergs will start splitting units?
I really hope you are kididng here. The reason infestors are so strong is because they are backbone of the zerg army. When the raven reached that kind of importance you might consider your buff.
Medivacs and tanks are the backbone of the terran army. When I make ravens, I put gas in ravens, not in tanks or medivacs, so ravens become the backbone of my army.
In short it would be so OP lategame. Just imagine yourself.
On September 03 2012 19:01 Snowbear wrote: I just dont understand why it's so hard to make the raven as sick great as the infestor. It's not that they are free or something... I would make the missile 75 energy and no upgrades needed. Maybe then zergs will start splitting units?
I really hope you are kididng here. The reason infestors are so strong is because they are backbone of the zerg army. When the raven reached that kind of importance you might consider your buff.
Medivacs and tanks are the backbone of the terran army. When I make ravens, I put gas in ravens, not in tanks or medivacs, so ravens become the backbone of my army.
That's so wrong, just from a production perspective. I might give you that arguement if you had larva production*, but as Terran you are not doing these huge production switches unless you are high supply - at which point you already have an army backbone. It's just not happening, this is completly made up.
*and even there we see broods and infestors and corruptors and banelings being produced, which are all gastintense and don't deny each other completly, though you have to adjust the ratio
On September 03 2012 19:01 Snowbear wrote: I just dont understand why it's so hard to make the raven as sick great as the infestor. It's not that they are free or something... I would make the missile 75 energy and no upgrades needed. Maybe then zergs will start splitting units?
I really hope you are kididng here. The reason infestors are so strong is because they are backbone of the zerg army. When the raven reached that kind of importance you might consider your buff.
Medivacs and tanks are the backbone of the terran army. When I make ravens, I put gas in ravens, not in tanks or medivacs, so ravens become the backbone of my army.
In short it would be so OP lategame. Just imagine yourself.
So it would be as strong as broodlord infestor? Isn't that what we terrans want?
On September 01 2012 01:49 [F_]aths wrote: I am amazed how many guys think when they don't agree with Blizzard's stance, that Blizzard is wrong.
This.
All the people complaining that because of MVP it's harder for other terrans..... I thought everyone was interested in the game being balanced at the very top level? I remember complaints because of patches where they made matchups more balanced in the bronze/silver league area, but you guys complain when they don't do it for low/mid masters?
MVP raised the bar, you follow suit or you fall behind, this has been the way for every race. Just be happy you have someone to copy/look up to. Zerg didn't have this for a while when they were losing, and neither did protoss.
If the game truly was balanced at the highest level all the koreans terrans would be dominating, because they're fucking better than the rest of the pros with few exceptions. The fact that foreign zergs and protosses can keep up with korean terrans speaks volumes about the game balance.
MVP raised the bar so Terran got nerfed. That's not balance. That's just knee jerk nerfing based on individual players skills and it's absolutely retarded. It's like giving Spain additional limiting penalties in the world cup because they're awesome as a team. Spain is supposed to dominate at the world cups because they're superior to other teams. The same goes to players like MVP.
There is no purpose to have e-celebs and pros if Blizzard keeps nerfing the race of whoever is doing the best currently, either individually or because of the metagame to keep balance statistics at 50%. It's not true balance and it never has been. Every change Blizzard has made since the ghost snipe nerf has been for the worse.
I think the main problem with this situation report is that it is taking current events into account quite well, except it's ignoring the fact that most of the top zergs are playing pretty poorly at the moment. There's some Protoss in good form, there's some Terrans in good form (Taeja!), but the only zerg playing halfway decently at the moment is Leenock.
The game's balance hangs on a razors edge at the moment; particularly at the highest levels. Imbalanced or not, I'm rather glad they're planning to leave the game unpatched. We'll see what happens.
On September 01 2012 01:49 [F_]aths wrote: I am amazed how many guys think when they don't agree with Blizzard's stance, that Blizzard is wrong.
This.
All the people complaining that because of MVP it's harder for other terrans..... I thought everyone was interested in the game being balanced at the very top level? I remember complaints because of patches where they made matchups more balanced in the bronze/silver league area, but you guys complain when they don't do it for low/mid masters?
MVP raised the bar, you follow suit or you fall behind, this has been the way for every race. Just be happy you have someone to copy/look up to. Zerg didn't have this for a while when they were losing, and neither did protoss.
If the game truly was balanced at the highest level all the koreans terrans would be dominating, because they're fucking better than the rest of the pros with few exceptions. The fact that foreign zergs and protosses can keep up with korean terrans speaks volumes about the game balance.
MVP raised the bar so Terran got nerfed. That's not balance. That's just knee jerk nerfing based on individual players skills and it's absolutely retarded. It's like giving Spain additional limiting penalties in the world cup because they're awesome as a team. Spain is supposed to dominate at the world cups because they're superior to other teams. The same goes to players like MVP.
There is no purpose to have e-celebs and pros if Blizzard keeps nerfing the race of whoever is doing the best currently, either individually or because of the metagame to keep balance statistics at 50%. It's not true balance and it never has been. Every change Blizzard has made since the ghost snipe nerf has been for the worse.
"If the game truly was balanced at the highest level all the koreans terrans would be dominating, because they're fucking better than the rest of the pros with few exceptions."
On September 01 2012 01:49 [F_]aths wrote: I am amazed how many guys think when they don't agree with Blizzard's stance, that Blizzard is wrong.
This.
All the people complaining that because of MVP it's harder for other terrans..... I thought everyone was interested in the game being balanced at the very top level? I remember complaints because of patches where they made matchups more balanced in the bronze/silver league area, but you guys complain when they don't do it for low/mid masters?
MVP raised the bar, you follow suit or you fall behind, this has been the way for every race. Just be happy you have someone to copy/look up to. Zerg didn't have this for a while when they were losing, and neither did protoss.
If the game truly was balanced at the highest level all the koreans terrans would be dominating, because they're fucking better than the rest of the pros with few exceptions. The fact that foreign zergs and protosses can keep up with korean terrans speaks volumes about the game balance.
MVP raised the bar so Terran got nerfed. That's not balance. That's just knee jerk nerfing based on individual players skills and it's absolutely retarded. It's like giving Spain additional limiting penalties in the world cup because they're awesome as a team. Spain is supposed to dominate at the world cups because they're superior to other teams. The same goes to players like MVP.
There is no purpose to have e-celebs and pros if Blizzard keeps nerfing the race of whoever is doing the best currently, either individually or because of the metagame to keep balance statistics at 50%. It's not true balance and it never has been. Every change Blizzard has made since the ghost snipe nerf has been for the worse.
"If the game truly was balanced at the highest level all the koreans terrans would be dominating, because they're fucking better than the rest of the pros with few exceptions."
...Please do show me the proof of this.
Watch pro players play since the beginning of the game and it's easy to see. Or do a search of one of my earlier posts where I did provide arguments for this standpoint. It's not too far back in my post count afaik. Haven't posted much lately.
On September 03 2012 21:15 althaz wrote: I think the main problem with this situation report is that it is taking current events into account quite well, except it's ignoring the fact that most of the top zergs are playing pretty poorly at the moment. There's some Protoss in good form, there's some Terrans in good form (Taeja!), but the only zerg playing halfway decently at the moment is Leenock.
This is the same thing that Kim is saying though. The zerg players now have to have some time to adjust to all the new terran strategies coming out. This should balance itself out.
On September 01 2012 01:49 [F_]aths wrote: I am amazed how many guys think when they don't agree with Blizzard's stance, that Blizzard is wrong.
This.
All the people complaining that because of MVP it's harder for other terrans..... I thought everyone was interested in the game being balanced at the very top level? I remember complaints because of patches where they made matchups more balanced in the bronze/silver league area, but you guys complain when they don't do it for low/mid masters?
MVP raised the bar, you follow suit or you fall behind, this has been the way for every race. Just be happy you have someone to copy/look up to. Zerg didn't have this for a while when they were losing, and neither did protoss.
If the game truly was balanced at the highest level all the koreans terrans would be dominating, because they're fucking better than the rest of the pros with few exceptions. The fact that foreign zergs and protosses can keep up with korean terrans speaks volumes about the game balance.
MVP raised the bar so Terran got nerfed. That's not balance. That's just knee jerk nerfing based on individual players skills and it's absolutely retarded. It's like giving Spain additional limiting penalties in the world cup because they're awesome as a team. Spain is supposed to dominate at the world cups because they're superior to other teams. The same goes to players like MVP.
There is no purpose to have e-celebs and pros if Blizzard keeps nerfing the race of whoever is doing the best currently, either individually or because of the metagame to keep balance statistics at 50%. It's not true balance and it never has been. Every change Blizzard has made since the ghost snipe nerf has been for the worse.
"If the game truly was balanced at the highest level all the koreans terrans would be dominating, because they're fucking better than the rest of the pros with few exceptions."
...Please do show me the proof of this.
Watch pro players play since the beginning of the game and it's easy to see. Or do a search of one of my earlier posts where I did provide arguments for this standpoint. It's not too far back in my post count afaik. Haven't posted much lately.
While I agree that Koreans tend to spend more time practicing, playing, and improving, to just say that "they're better, and should never lose to top foreigners" seems incorrect to me.
And it's not that Terran got nerfed b/c MVP did well, they just didn't get the buffs that were being playtested as merely possible to begin with. At no point did Bliz ever come out and say, "this is what we're going to give you, 100% no questions asked," and then take it all back. They said they were playtesting things to see how they looked.
Or perhaps there was a metagame shift as the zerg buffs came in, and the zerg were becoming more solid mechanically to begin with. To dismiss all foreigners as immediately bad is just poor, in my opinion.
Also, i feel like that's a poor analogy, (the Spanish national team). That'd be the equivalent of waiting until their armies were about to fight, then all of a sudden half of MVP's army just gets vaporized by nothing at all.
I personally feel like the game is relatively well balanced at almost all levels.
Among all the whining, I read some interesting remarks about the map pool. It's true that all the maps nowadays tends to encourage turtle-fests / macro games. It's sometimes very nice but why not vary a little like putting some rush maps (<15 mn games), some mediums (< 25 mn games), and some larges (>25mn games).
It would solve some of the balance issues for sure since more diversity in the map pool also means increasing the number of viable styles. Moreover, most tournament have a veto system to level the playfield.
77% of terrans would pick Zerg thinking this would be the easiest/strongest race to play if untrained. 57% of zergs would pick terran thinking this is the easiest/strongest race to play if untrained. 53% of toss would pick zerg thinking this is the easiest/strongest race to play if untrained.
Interpretation: * Terran thinks Zerg is very OP * Zergs think Terran is OP * Protoss think Z/T are equal
On September 01 2012 01:14 TheDwf wrote: So this is how Blizzard decides to balance or not the game? By watching Mvp crushing inferior Zergs then concluding TvZ is OK? How amateurish.
Yup, this is exactly how Blizzard balances this game. They just look at tournament results see which race is winning and stop them from winning.
77% of terrans would pick Zerg thinking this would be the easiest/strongest race to play if untrained. 57% of zergs would pick terran thinking this is the easiest/strongest race to play if untrained. 53% of toss would pick zerg thinking this is the easiest/strongest race to play if untrained.
Interpretation: * Terran thinks Zerg is very OP * Zergs think Terran is OP * Protoss think Z/T are equal
No, you certainly cannot interpret the answers to your poll this way. You asked people which race they would play in an offrace tournament, not if they think said race is the easiest or the strongest. The two or three aspects would obviously be the same for an unknown part of the answers, but that's the point, you don't know if someone answering “I would play Protoss” tells this because a) he thinks Protoss is the strongest and/or b) he thinks Protoss is the easiest and/or c) he thinks Protoss would be more fun and/or d) he has more Protoss knowledge than his other offrace, etc., etc.. Besides, drawing percentages out of 40-50 answers does not make any sense. If you want to do things properly, just ask people “Which race do you think is the easiest/strongest/etc.” Not that answers would be really interesting given the average knowledge of players but at least the question would be clearer.
what i dont understand is why they didn't just say
"terran is doing better in tournaments, we're going to put this change on pause for a while and let the metagame develop"
instead they explicitly talked about mvp and his raven strategies vs foreigner zergs and nestea (who in all honestly, amoves, defends drops and techs as slowly as EU zergs) he hangs around on lair tech way too long, just like these euro zergs, spending multiple $thousands of mineral/gas on a midgame all in. players like mvp just sit, gobble up the all in and take two more bases and start massing ravens
Why would they base the changes on this? in a normal game with competent KR zerg (not nestea), they dont waste 1k gas on mutas, and then 2k gas coinflipping on a baneling mutaling all in and then go into broodlords the most gas intensive, immobile army comp on the biggest map in the game. by the time nestea gets his broods across and deals with the defensive PF's his broods are invalidated. that's why koreans are starting to use nydus and take the middle bases earlier as Z on this map.
edit: the map i'm talking about is metropolis. a lot of KR zergs say this map is terran favored so they try to end it early with baneling / ling all ins or muta ling bane timings. there is evidence of this everywhere, blizzard just chooses to ignore the failed all ins by zerg and pretend there is some new hyper viable terran strategy like massing spell casters/turtling. thats not a new strategy. in my opinion, that is a response to KR zergs playing extremely cheesy for multiple major tournaments in a row on this map..
On September 03 2012 20:54 WaesumNinja wrote: broodlord infestor has shit for mobility, abuse that... you can also beat infestors with ghosts handily with either snipe or emp.
You know what. You've just made me realise what the problem is.
Due to the way the maps are designed with bases so close together, you can't actually do this because sacking one of your bases in this game means they're already at your other base straight away so it's either base race or fight them.
Bases need badly to be spread out more. Zerg has nydus to go between bases, Protoss has warp ins and Terrans can build production at them/wall off/planetary.
Yeah well i guess that all of a sudden i got really bad at playing versus Zerg, while all the zergs on ladder got so much better as players. Somehow i maintained my skill level, and even improved, against terran and tos but Zerg players are such extraordinary beings that they all jumped up a level in skill. Im so impressed. I wonder, did all the zergs go to a training-camp together?
On September 03 2012 20:54 WaesumNinja wrote: broodlord infestor has shit for mobility, abuse that... you can also beat infestors with ghosts handily with either snipe or emp.
You know what. You've just made me realise what the problem is.
Due to the way the maps are designed with bases so close together, you can't actually do this because sacking one of your bases in this game means they're already at your other base straight away so it's either base race or fight them.
Bases need badly to be spread out more. Zerg has nydus to go between bases, Protoss has warp ins and Terrans can build production at them/wall off/planetary.
I think a big problem with Planetary defence is that they are immobile, slow shooting big buildings. That means that those 30 well microed lings run right past without too many major problems. I think the widow mine will help that a lot though in the upcoming expansion.
On September 03 2012 20:54 WaesumNinja wrote: broodlord infestor has shit for mobility, abuse that... you can also beat infestors with ghosts handily with either snipe or emp.
You know what. You've just made me realise what the problem is.
Due to the way the maps are designed with bases so close together, you can't actually do this because sacking one of your bases in this game means they're already at your other base straight away so it's either base race or fight them.
Bases need badly to be spread out more. Zerg has nydus to go between bases, Protoss has warp ins and Terrans can build production at them/wall off/planetary.
protoss wouldn't be able to take a third vs zergs if you spread them out, it would break the matchup completely
On September 03 2012 20:54 WaesumNinja wrote: broodlord infestor has shit for mobility, abuse that... you can also beat infestors with ghosts handily with either snipe or emp.
You know what. You've just made me realise what the problem is.
Due to the way the maps are designed with bases so close together, you can't actually do this because sacking one of your bases in this game means they're already at your other base straight away so it's either base race or fight them.
Bases need badly to be spread out more. Zerg has nydus to go between bases, Protoss has warp ins and Terrans can build production at them/wall off/planetary.
protoss wouldn't be able to take a third vs zergs if you spread them out, it would break the matchup completely
Arent protoss getting recall on nexus? That along with warp in and canons should be enough.
Funny thing I find is that they stop the buffs due to MVP doing well.
Yet the top Zergs NEVER had problems that equated the need for the Queen buff. Even Stephano who is arguably below the top Korean Zs (not by much) never had a problem.
On September 01 2012 01:49 [F_]aths wrote: I am amazed how many guys think when they don't agree with Blizzard's stance, that Blizzard is wrong.
This.
All the people complaining that because of MVP it's harder for other terrans..... I thought everyone was interested in the game being balanced at the very top level? I remember complaints because of patches where they made matchups more balanced in the bronze/silver league area, but you guys complain when they don't do it for low/mid masters?
MVP raised the bar, you follow suit or you fall behind, this has been the way for every race. Just be happy you have someone to copy/look up to. Zerg didn't have this for a while when they were losing, and neither did protoss.
If the game truly was balanced at the highest level all the koreans terrans would be dominating, because they're fucking better than the rest of the pros with few exceptions. The fact that foreign zergs and protosses can keep up with korean terrans speaks volumes about the game balance.
MVP raised the bar so Terran got nerfed. That's not balance. That's just knee jerk nerfing based on individual players skills and it's absolutely retarded. It's like giving Spain additional limiting penalties in the world cup because they're awesome as a team. Spain is supposed to dominate at the world cups because they're superior to other teams. The same goes to players like MVP.
There is no purpose to have e-celebs and pros if Blizzard keeps nerfing the race of whoever is doing the best currently, either individually or because of the metagame to keep balance statistics at 50%. It's not true balance and it never has been. Every change Blizzard has made since the ghost snipe nerf has been for the worse.
The problem is proving that korean terrans are better players than korean zergs and protoss.
Nothing you can do can prove that... every race is very different.
This is what I think they should do for ravens: 1. Let them be built from reactored starports. The build time is already very long and you would still need at least 1 tech lab for upgrades in the same way you get stim for example. 2. Reduce the energy cost of seeker missle to 75 or 100 BUT add like a 20-30 second cooldown to seeker missle just like the way storm is. I think 2 seeker missles back to back from 1 raven would probably be OP but this would prevent that and you need good micro to save the raven after 1 seeker missle so I don't think it would be overly strong.
On September 03 2012 15:29 Doko wrote: As a terran buff: Ravens could use -10 build time and maybe a slightly stronger auto turret, pretty much anything else breaks a lot of things. As a zerg nerf: A model size reduction on infestors to make them more susceptible to emp or movement speed reduction would make a huge difference as well. I highly doubt they would touch dmg or casting range.
imo, Fungal Growth shouldn't hit air units. It's basically "they all die" as the balance for units involves abusing aerial mobility. If they have to stand and fight against something that can fight back, they are basically dead. It's not like they don't already have the best air-to-air unit (Corruptors having a very powerful transition that they inherently pave-the-way-for/protect) and the most versatile aerial harass unit.
Does Zerg really needs Fungal hitting air units? Are Corruptors, Queens, and Hydras not enough?
Don't know about Ravens, as I don't play Terran. But the "novel" (i.e. not balanced, but just personally nteresting) solution I had for heat-seeker missle, was to increase the speed, but make it targetable with an HP. So the "counter" to it, isn't run away, but instead shooting it down (which has to be done manually). Of course, that sort of changes the nature of the thing, but seems more interesting to me than just forcing a retreat.
On September 03 2012 20:54 WaesumNinja wrote: broodlord infestor has shit for mobility, abuse that... you can also beat infestors with ghosts handily with either snipe or emp.
You know what. You've just made me realise what the problem is.
Due to the way the maps are designed with bases so close together, you can't actually do this because sacking one of your bases in this game means they're already at your other base straight away so it's either base race or fight them.
Bases need badly to be spread out more. Zerg has nydus to go between bases, Protoss has warp ins and Terrans can build production at them/wall off/planetary.
protoss wouldn't be able to take a third vs zergs if you spread them out, it would break the matchup completely
What about maps like Fighting Spirit in BW where you can wall your third base off and although it's further away you can go run save it really quickly?
The bases being so close together is literally breaking the game. Base races are inevitable if both players go back to attack as it's literally impossible to get back before you lose 2 or three bases. Take a look at Cloud Kingdom for example, once your fourth is under attack and you're off out on the map you may aswell go for a base race as there's no way in hell you'll get back before he's killed your fourth, third and is pushing at your natural. If you go back to defend in that situation you may as well GG as he has all his bases and you're down to 1 mining base at that point.
Ohana is even worse. It's a smaller map and your bases are even more closer together.
It's far too easy to secure a fourth base on the majority of maps in this game and leads to not only base races but people forgoing any form of mid game at all as as soon as you get your third, your fourth is basically secured and you might as well go straight for Hive.
On September 03 2012 20:54 WaesumNinja wrote: broodlord infestor has shit for mobility, abuse that... you can also beat infestors with ghosts handily with either snipe or emp.
You know what. You've just made me realise what the problem is.
Due to the way the maps are designed with bases so close together, you can't actually do this because sacking one of your bases in this game means they're already at your other base straight away so it's either base race or fight them.
Bases need badly to be spread out more. Zerg has nydus to go between bases, Protoss has warp ins and Terrans can build production at them/wall off/planetary.
protoss wouldn't be able to take a third vs zergs if you spread them out, it would break the matchup completely
What about maps like Fighting Spirit in BW where you can wall your third base off and although it's further away you can go run save it really quickly?
The bases being so close together is literally breaking the game. Base races are inevitable if both players go back to attack as it's literally impossible to get back before you lose 2 or three bases. Take a look at Cloud Kingdom for example, once your fourth is under attack and you're off out on the map you may aswell go for a base race as there's no way in hell you'll get back before he's killed your fourth, third and is pushing at your natural. If you go back to defend in that situation you may as well GG as he has all his bases and you're down to 1 mining base at that point.
Ohana is even worse. It's a smaller map and your bases are even more closer together.
It's far too easy to secure a fourth base on the majority of maps in this game and leads to not only base races but people forgoing any form of mid game at all as as soon as you get your third, your fourth is basically secured and you might as well go straight for Hive.
I completely agree. Especially on maps like cloud kingdom if you play a meching style, which I know you do, then it's ridiculously hard to move out on the map because any small counter attack with bio will do immense damage.
A better example would be Match Point as that's a 2 player map like the others.
The third is further away than say for example Ohana which the third is just a second natural, yet it's close enough to defend both bases and by getting your third you don't instantly have a fourth base secured.
walloff expansions in sc2 I really miss them, testbug and crossfire had those, was really nice to expand there as protoss. Liked the crossfire one especially, hard to reinforce, but easy to defend against a bigger force, unless they went full force or drop. And imo every race in sc2 can utilize these bases in some way or the other. But they dropped out of fashion i think, when the whole middle of the map had to be a giant open area, because otherwise siege tanks were op. Still hoping they make a return, but doubt it a little with the highest ingame normal attack range moving from 13 to 22 soon. (including everyone moves over to HotS) Atleast its a t3 unit, but with detection from stargate there is no risky involved into a fast air tech. But thats so far in the future, right now i am really interested in the new gsl map. Kinda fell in love with the middle.
On September 04 2012 08:06 Qikz wrote: A better example would be Match Point as that's a 2 player map like the others.
The third is further away than say for example Ohana which the third is just a second natural, yet it's close enough to defend both bases and by getting your third you don't instantly have a fourth base secured.
Wasnt it concluded that daybreak is the sc2 remake of match point. It does work in your favor since daybreak is a pretty good map
On September 03 2012 13:12 My_Fake_Plastic_Luv wrote: I'm really just a whiny terran and don't really understand anything. But I got a few questions 1) Why does DKim/Blizz team make the changes so drastic (thinking for instance snipe with ghosts). I mean is there a big problem with adding like 5 hitpoints to something or 1 range. 2) Are terrans complaining about fungal growth (I think this is the real problem zvt btw)? I really hate watching sht get fungaled over and over. I mean after the first fungal it takes minimal skillz to repeat fungal a bunch of units to death. Personally I think there should be a cool down for fungaled units... so they can run/snipe infestas; think that would make for some nice micro situations. Compare fungal to emp/storm, these spells don't necessarily bone a bunch of opposing units. 3) Why don't pro-terrans pop one raven before starporting medievacs (especially with that reactor hellions, cloaked banshee). Seems to me terran should use an early game raven with their map-control hellion force. Or does this completely f the build order into rine/tank. Discuss this sht plz.
I'm a bit late to your discussion but you bring up interesting points!
1) Completely agree - I feel like subtle changes would make more sense
2) I hate fungals but I understand it's an integral part of balance. I feel that it is the strongest spell in the game, given how it punishes so absolutely, especially at the low skill level where you can't split your units constantly.
3)This heavily delays your initial tech - i.e. you couldn't do double ebay upgrades, or hit your regular double medvac timing for a push/drops, or it would delay your siege/stim/CS tech.
Gas is no problem for late game, but for early game it is absolutely crucial. 200 less gas that early means you're delaying _something_ by 30~60 seconds (depending on how greedy you are and when you get to quad gas). Plus I feel it makes you more vulnerable to aggressive zerg builds like fast muta or bane/roach busts.
On September 03 2012 13:12 My_Fake_Plastic_Luv wrote: I'm really just a whiny terran and don't really understand anything. But I got a few questions 1) Why does DKim/Blizz team make the changes so drastic (thinking for instance snipe with ghosts). I mean is there a big problem with adding like 5 hitpoints to something or 1 range. 2) Are terrans complaining about fungal growth (I think this is the real problem zvt btw)? I really hate watching sht get fungaled over and over. I mean after the first fungal it takes minimal skillz to repeat fungal a bunch of units to death. Personally I think there should be a cool down for fungaled units... so they can run/snipe infestas; think that would make for some nice micro situations. Compare fungal to emp/storm, these spells don't necessarily bone a bunch of opposing units. 3) Why don't pro-terrans pop one raven before starporting medievacs (especially with that reactor hellions, cloaked banshee). Seems to me terran should use an early game raven with their map-control hellion force. Or does this completely f the build order into rine/tank. Discuss this sht plz.
I'm a bit late to your discussion but you bring up interesting points!
1) Completely agree - I feel like subtle changes would make more sense
2) I hate fungals but I understand it's an integral part of balance. I feel that it is the strongest spell in the game, given how it punishes so absolutely, especially at the low skill level where you can't split your units constantly.
3)This heavily delays your initial tech - i.e. you couldn't do double ebay upgrades, or hit your regular double medvac timing for a push/drops, or it would delay your siege/stim/CS tech.
Gas is no problem for late game, but for early game it is absolutely crucial. 200 less gas that early means you're delaying _something_ by 30~60 seconds (depending on how greedy you are and when you get to quad gas). Plus I feel it makes you more vulnerable to aggressive zerg builds like fast muta or bane/roach busts.
For point one, let me say that they tried that in Warcraft 3. At one point, they lowered the Beastmaster's strength by one (25 less HP out of a few hundred, 1 less damage out of a couple dozen). It turned out that people just needed to L2P.
I think terran players are enraged by two points, that unfortunately get mixed up and twisted around.
1) Out of the sudden, Blizzard is careful not to change the game too much and rather lets the meta game evolve. That's for two changes that have a rather minor effect. This is the opposite of giving two significant buffs when the meta-game is balanced seemingly out of the blue. Especially if one change completely trashes the main build and win % of one race.
2) The reasoning by Blizzard along the line of "One Terran did great and another one did OK in one major tournament - thus it appears there isn't a problem. Especially as one Terran did use ravens as we want and even won the game". This suck thrice. First of all, the same reason could be applied to the Zerg's dark age, where Fruitdealer and Nestea still won the GSL. Did that prevent Terran nerfs or Zerg buffs? Nope! Secondly they took the worst snapshot possible when they look at a tourney where MVP, the guy with the most GSL titles, who is hailed as probably the best player in the world, beats a bunch of Zergs that are good, but NOT GSL calibre. Even MVP only used the ravens on a giant map that is prone to be split in half, so to conclude that ravens are fine because a superior player could make them work on a single map is ludicrous. Finally there is the comparison to the queen buff, which allegedly should help against the 'imba 4-6 hellion contain'. This contain as not a problem at all at the pro-level and tourney scene. Yet the buff still came through.
For those two major reasons many terran players are frustrated and annoyed, because it's a clear display of double standards, because David Kim still seems to only remember the ages of Zerg tears.
On September 04 2012 18:23 Thrombozyt wrote: I think terran players are enraged by two points, that unfortunately get mixed up and twisted around.
1) Out of the sudden, Blizzard is careful not to change the game too much and rather lets the meta game evolve. That's for two changes that have a rather minor effect. This is the opposite of giving two significant buffs when the meta-game is balanced seemingly out of the blue. Especially if one change completely trashes the main build and win % of one race.
2) The reasoning by Blizzard along the line of "One Terran did great and another one did OK in one major tournament - thus it appears there isn't a problem. Especially as one Terran did use ravens as we want and even won the game". This suck thrice. First of all, the same reason could be applied to the Zerg's dark age, where Fruitdealer and Nestea still won the GSL. Did that prevent Terran nerfs or Zerg buffs? Nope! Secondly they took the worst snapshot possible when they look at a tourney where MVP, the guy with the most GSL titles, who is hailed as probably the best player in the world, beats a bunch of Zergs that are good, but NOT GSL calibre. Even MVP only used the ravens on a giant map that is prone to be split in half, so to conclude that ravens are fine because a superior player could make them work on a single map is ludicrous. Finally there is the comparison to the queen buff, which allegedly should help against the 'imba 4-6 hellion contain'. This contain as not a problem at all at the pro-level and tourney scene. Yet the buff still came through.
For those two major reasons many terran players are frustrated and annoyed, because it's a clear display of double standards, because David Kim still seems to only remember the ages of Zerg tears.
Well said, exactly my thoughts... double standards during the balancing process.
On September 04 2012 18:23 Thrombozyt wrote: I think terran players are enraged by two points, that unfortunately get mixed up and twisted around.
1) Out of the sudden, Blizzard is careful not to change the game too much and rather lets the meta game evolve. That's for two changes that have a rather minor effect. This is the opposite of giving two significant buffs when the meta-game is balanced seemingly out of the blue. Especially if one change completely trashes the main build and win % of one race.
2) The reasoning by Blizzard along the line of "One Terran did great and another one did OK in one major tournament - thus it appears there isn't a problem. Especially as one Terran did use ravens as we want and even won the game". This suck thrice. First of all, the same reason could be applied to the Zerg's dark age, where Fruitdealer and Nestea still won the GSL. Did that prevent Terran nerfs or Zerg buffs? Nope! Secondly they took the worst snapshot possible when they look at a tourney where MVP, the guy with the most GSL titles, who is hailed as probably the best player in the world, beats a bunch of Zergs that are good, but NOT GSL calibre. Even MVP only used the ravens on a giant map that is prone to be split in half, so to conclude that ravens are fine because a superior player could make them work on a single map is ludicrous. Finally there is the comparison to the queen buff, which allegedly should help against the 'imba 4-6 hellion contain'. This contain as not a problem at all at the pro-level and tourney scene. Yet the buff still came through.
For those two major reasons many terran players are frustrated and annoyed, because it's a clear display of double standards, because David Kim still seems to only remember the ages of Zerg tears.
Well said, exactly my thoughts... double standards during the balancing process.
It could also be that they are learning and like you said "out of the blue" they decided to let the metagame take its course because thats the better course of action. Like they said, its the first time they are doing this, and of course there always has to be a first time for everything.
On September 03 2012 20:54 WaesumNinja wrote: broodlord infestor has shit for mobility, abuse that... you can also beat infestors with ghosts handily with either snipe or emp.
You know what. You've just made me realise what the problem is.
Due to the way the maps are designed with bases so close together, you can't actually do this because sacking one of your bases in this game means they're already at your other base straight away so it's either base race or fight them.
Bases need badly to be spread out more. Zerg has nydus to go between bases, Protoss has warp ins and Terrans can build production at them/wall off/planetary.
Bigger maps with more spread out bases would pretty much nerf the composition yeah, since you can't nydus broodlords. All other zerg units would be fine.
Wouldn't really large maps disfavor terrans though? Protoss and zerg would be capable of reinforcing quickly with nydus/warpin. The only thing i can think of really would be that terran moves his production facilities forward but it doesn't sound viable unless he's maxed already. I think mech would need a buff also since because of its poor mobility, it would need to be spread out to protect the bigger area around the bases.
On September 04 2012 18:23 Thrombozyt wrote: I think terran players are enraged by two points, that unfortunately get mixed up and twisted around.
1) Out of the sudden, Blizzard is careful not to change the game too much and rather lets the meta game evolve. That's for two changes that have a rather minor effect. This is the opposite of giving two significant buffs when the meta-game is balanced seemingly out of the blue. Especially if one change completely trashes the main build and win % of one race.
2) The reasoning by Blizzard along the line of "One Terran did great and another one did OK in one major tournament - thus it appears there isn't a problem. Especially as one Terran did use ravens as we want and even won the game". This suck thrice. First of all, the same reason could be applied to the Zerg's dark age, where Fruitdealer and Nestea still won the GSL. Did that prevent Terran nerfs or Zerg buffs? Nope! Secondly they took the worst snapshot possible when they look at a tourney where MVP, the guy with the most GSL titles, who is hailed as probably the best player in the world, beats a bunch of Zergs that are good, but NOT GSL calibre. Even MVP only used the ravens on a giant map that is prone to be split in half, so to conclude that ravens are fine because a superior player could make them work on a single map is ludicrous. Finally there is the comparison to the queen buff, which allegedly should help against the 'imba 4-6 hellion contain'. This contain as not a problem at all at the pro-level and tourney scene. Yet the buff still came through.
For those two major reasons many terran players are frustrated and annoyed, because it's a clear display of double standards, because David Kim still seems to only remember the ages of Zerg tears.
Well said, exactly my thoughts... double standards during the balancing process.
It could also be that they are learning and like you said "out of the blue" they decided to let the metagame take its course because thats the better course of action. Like they said, its the first time they are doing this, and of course there always has to be a first time for everything.
If you realized, that you messed up, then why not take back the offending change? Man up!
On September 04 2012 18:23 Thrombozyt wrote: I think terran players are enraged by two points, that unfortunately get mixed up and twisted around.
1) Out of the sudden, Blizzard is careful not to change the game too much and rather lets the meta game evolve. That's for two changes that have a rather minor effect. This is the opposite of giving two significant buffs when the meta-game is balanced seemingly out of the blue. Especially if one change completely trashes the main build and win % of one race.
2) The reasoning by Blizzard along the line of "One Terran did great and another one did OK in one major tournament - thus it appears there isn't a problem. Especially as one Terran did use ravens as we want and even won the game". This suck thrice. First of all, the same reason could be applied to the Zerg's dark age, where Fruitdealer and Nestea still won the GSL. Did that prevent Terran nerfs or Zerg buffs? Nope! Secondly they took the worst snapshot possible when they look at a tourney where MVP, the guy with the most GSL titles, who is hailed as probably the best player in the world, beats a bunch of Zergs that are good, but NOT GSL calibre. Even MVP only used the ravens on a giant map that is prone to be split in half, so to conclude that ravens are fine because a superior player could make them work on a single map is ludicrous. Finally there is the comparison to the queen buff, which allegedly should help against the 'imba 4-6 hellion contain'. This contain as not a problem at all at the pro-level and tourney scene. Yet the buff still came through.
For those two major reasons many terran players are frustrated and annoyed, because it's a clear display of double standards, because David Kim still seems to only remember the ages of Zerg tears.
Well said, exactly my thoughts... double standards during the balancing process.
It could also be that they are learning and like you said "out of the blue" they decided to let the metagame take its course because thats the better course of action. Like they said, its the first time they are doing this, and of course there always has to be a first time for everything.
If you realized, that you messed up, then why not take back the offending change? Man up!
cause you already bought the game, they have your money. they simply dont give a fuck
On September 04 2012 18:23 Thrombozyt wrote: I think terran players are enraged by two points, that unfortunately get mixed up and twisted around.
1) Out of the sudden, Blizzard is careful not to change the game too much and rather lets the meta game evolve. That's for two changes that have a rather minor effect. This is the opposite of giving two significant buffs when the meta-game is balanced seemingly out of the blue. Especially if one change completely trashes the main build and win % of one race.
2) The reasoning by Blizzard along the line of "One Terran did great and another one did OK in one major tournament - thus it appears there isn't a problem. Especially as one Terran did use ravens as we want and even won the game". This suck thrice. First of all, the same reason could be applied to the Zerg's dark age, where Fruitdealer and Nestea still won the GSL. Did that prevent Terran nerfs or Zerg buffs? Nope! Secondly they took the worst snapshot possible when they look at a tourney where MVP, the guy with the most GSL titles, who is hailed as probably the best player in the world, beats a bunch of Zergs that are good, but NOT GSL calibre. Even MVP only used the ravens on a giant map that is prone to be split in half, so to conclude that ravens are fine because a superior player could make them work on a single map is ludicrous. Finally there is the comparison to the queen buff, which allegedly should help against the 'imba 4-6 hellion contain'. This contain as not a problem at all at the pro-level and tourney scene. Yet the buff still came through.
For those two major reasons many terran players are frustrated and annoyed, because it's a clear display of double standards, because David Kim still seems to only remember the ages of Zerg tears.
Well said, exactly my thoughts... double standards during the balancing process.
It could also be that they are learning and like you said "out of the blue" they decided to let the metagame take its course because thats the better course of action. Like they said, its the first time they are doing this, and of course there always has to be a first time for everything.
If you realized, that you messed up, then why not take back the offending change? Man up!
cause you already bought the game, they have your money. they simply dont give a fuck
yeah, that's why they are not patching, investing into tournaments and watching the game.
I wish TL was a bit stricter about brainless blizzard bashing...
On September 04 2012 18:23 Thrombozyt wrote: I think terran players are enraged by two points, that unfortunately get mixed up and twisted around.
1) Out of the sudden, Blizzard is careful not to change the game too much and rather lets the meta game evolve. That's for two changes that have a rather minor effect. This is the opposite of giving two significant buffs when the meta-game is balanced seemingly out of the blue. Especially if one change completely trashes the main build and win % of one race.
2) The reasoning by Blizzard along the line of "One Terran did great and another one did OK in one major tournament - thus it appears there isn't a problem. Especially as one Terran did use ravens as we want and even won the game". This suck thrice. First of all, the same reason could be applied to the Zerg's dark age, where Fruitdealer and Nestea still won the GSL. Did that prevent Terran nerfs or Zerg buffs? Nope! Secondly they took the worst snapshot possible when they look at a tourney where MVP, the guy with the most GSL titles, who is hailed as probably the best player in the world, beats a bunch of Zergs that are good, but NOT GSL calibre. Even MVP only used the ravens on a giant map that is prone to be split in half, so to conclude that ravens are fine because a superior player could make them work on a single map is ludicrous. Finally there is the comparison to the queen buff, which allegedly should help against the 'imba 4-6 hellion contain'. This contain as not a problem at all at the pro-level and tourney scene. Yet the buff still came through.
For those two major reasons many terran players are frustrated and annoyed, because it's a clear display of double standards, because David Kim still seems to only remember the ages of Zerg tears.
Well said, exactly my thoughts... double standards during the balancing process.
It could also be that they are learning and like you said "out of the blue" they decided to let the metagame take its course because thats the better course of action. Like they said, its the first time they are doing this, and of course there always has to be a first time for everything.
If you realized, that you messed up, then why not take back the offending change? Man up!
cause you already bought the game, they have your money. they simply dont give a fuck
yeah, that's why they are not patching, investing into tournaments and watching the game.
I wish TL was a bit stricter about brainless blizzard bashing...
and i wish all blizzard fanboys like you would get cancer, and when your family goes to see you in the hospital they get in a car accident and die, so that you die all alone.
On September 03 2012 20:54 WaesumNinja wrote: broodlord infestor has shit for mobility, abuse that... you can also beat infestors with ghosts handily with either snipe or emp.
You know what. You've just made me realise what the problem is.
Due to the way the maps are designed with bases so close together, you can't actually do this because sacking one of your bases in this game means they're already at your other base straight away so it's either base race or fight them.
Bases need badly to be spread out more. Zerg has nydus to go between bases, Protoss has warp ins and Terrans can build production at them/wall off/planetary.
Bigger maps with more spread out bases would pretty much nerf the composition yeah, since you can't nydus broodlords. All other zerg units would be fine.
Wouldn't really large maps disfavor terrans though? Protoss and zerg would be capable of reinforcing quickly with nydus/warpin. The only thing i can think of really would be that terran moves his production facilities forward but it doesn't sound viable unless he's maxed already. I think mech would need a buff also since because of its poor mobility, it would need to be spread out to protect the bigger area around the bases.
You just build some production at your newer bases, kind of like how Protoss did it in Broodwar and heck even Terran did it (I know I did) with factories.
On September 04 2012 22:59 kyllinghest wrote: Nestea and Fruidealer won the first GSLs, perhaps its time to roll back the changes done to balance and maps?
For the map changes, there is whole forum and multiple teams of non-blizzard related people who are nearly exclusively able to do that... if it was wanted or needed. Thing is, that those people are actually making those maps people like you want. Rush distances of Ohana, Cloud Kingdom and other maps aren't really much longer than Xel Naga Caverns, maps with too many bases that only zerg could take have been removed and replaced with maps that where all races can macro on.
And yeah, if you want to roll back all the changes, then I think it should really be ALL the changes starting in the beta.
On September 04 2012 22:59 kyllinghest wrote: Nestea and Fruidealer won the first GSLs, perhaps its time to roll back the changes done to balance and maps?
For the map changes, there is whole forum and multiple teams of non-blizzard related people who are nearly exclusively able to do that... if it was wanted or needed. Thing is, that those people are actually making those maps people like you want. Rush distances of Ohana, Cloud Kingdom and other maps aren't really much longer than Xel Naga Caverns, maps with too many bases that only zerg could take have been removed and replaced with maps that where all races can macro on.
And yeah, if you want to roll back all the changes, then I think it should really be ALL the changes starting in the beta.
Honestly.. I'm not sure anymore, if 1 supply 2 armor roaches are that bad for terran..
On September 04 2012 22:59 kyllinghest wrote: Nestea and Fruidealer won the first GSLs, perhaps its time to roll back the changes done to balance and maps?
For the map changes, there is whole forum and multiple teams of non-blizzard related people who are nearly exclusively able to do that... if it was wanted or needed. Thing is, that those people are actually making those maps people like you want. Rush distances of Ohana, Cloud Kingdom and other maps aren't really much longer than Xel Naga Caverns, maps with too many bases that only zerg could take have been removed and replaced with maps that where all races can macro on.
And yeah, if you want to roll back all the changes, then I think it should really be ALL the changes starting in the beta.
Honestly.. I'm not sure anymore, if 1 supply 2 armor roaches are that bad for terran..
and 20HP/sec burrow regeneration
Broodlords, Infestors and Corruptors used to be "pretty good" as well...
But yeah, Terrans would also get 65sec build time barracks, 40sec bunkers and energy thors (which were actually quite worse, apart from the 50energy strike canons, due to their size and no air splash) from that. Oh wait, Terran actually has all of that
Is anyone else thinking, that everything that was ever nerfed because it was too strong vs zerg is a direct result of it being designed against 1 supply 2armor 3range roaches? Like reapers: probably not that big of a problem, with the prenerf roaches. 2dmg less per shot from reapers and more roaches, might have been enough (4range roaches were on the same patch as nitro pack, depot/barracks nerf) Like snipe: mass ghost endgame Terran (like 30-50 ghosts) --> build 100-150 roaches. 30 full energy ghosts can snipe 60 roaches, which is nearly max right now (if you add workers). But with only 1supply... Like 2rax: if there is the possibility for a 1base roach opening, with roaches that only receive 3dmg per shot from marines... probably not such an interesting build
that's not to say those roaches weren't imba, but it feels like by nerfing them, blizzard opened the box of the zerg pandora
On September 04 2012 18:23 Thrombozyt wrote: I think terran players are enraged by two points, that unfortunately get mixed up and twisted around.
1) Out of the sudden, Blizzard is careful not to change the game too much and rather lets the meta game evolve. That's for two changes that have a rather minor effect. This is the opposite of giving two significant buffs when the meta-game is balanced seemingly out of the blue. Especially if one change completely trashes the main build and win % of one race.
2) The reasoning by Blizzard along the line of "One Terran did great and another one did OK in one major tournament - thus it appears there isn't a problem. Especially as one Terran did use ravens as we want and even won the game". This suck thrice. First of all, the same reason could be applied to the Zerg's dark age, where Fruitdealer and Nestea still won the GSL. Did that prevent Terran nerfs or Zerg buffs? Nope! Secondly they took the worst snapshot possible when they look at a tourney where MVP, the guy with the most GSL titles, who is hailed as probably the best player in the world, beats a bunch of Zergs that are good, but NOT GSL calibre. Even MVP only used the ravens on a giant map that is prone to be split in half, so to conclude that ravens are fine because a superior player could make them work on a single map is ludicrous. Finally there is the comparison to the queen buff, which allegedly should help against the 'imba 4-6 hellion contain'. This contain as not a problem at all at the pro-level and tourney scene. Yet the buff still came through.
For those two major reasons many terran players are frustrated and annoyed, because it's a clear display of double standards, because David Kim still seems to only remember the ages of Zerg tears.
Well said, exactly my thoughts... double standards during the balancing process.
It could also be that they are learning and like you said "out of the blue" they decided to let the metagame take its course because thats the better course of action. Like they said, its the first time they are doing this, and of course there always has to be a first time for everything.
It is not that they are learning, and not the first time they are doing this. Look at the 1.33 infestor in 2011, IIRC this was when Blizzard said they didn't want to make any kneejerk reactions to the game. The fact is we are witnessing the double standard once again, DKim and the balance team are not trying out some new wait-and-see approach. Blizz has always been extremely quick on the trigger (one tournament is all the evidence they need) when it comes to finding reasons to nerf Terran strategies, but very slow and like "let's wait and see what happens for a few months" when it comes to strategies that are powerful against Terran. The double standard is clear as day bro
If you look at things objectively, it is impossible to say that this is anything other than unfair. The game has achieved relative balance a long time ago. They made so many changes that were unnecessary unless you inherently favored the other 2 races.
Warp Prism's never needed to be buffed. It was fine before. Does it really matter at this point? It's a little more annoying, but negligible. But the reasoning that they wanted players to use Warp Prisms more was just bad. Players were already using them.
The Barracks build time didn't really need the nerf. Zergs had already gotten good at defending 2 rax, making proxy rax the only thing to worry about on these larger maps.
The Raven buff was nice, but still insufficient. There were MANY Terrans practicing Raven styles (with mediocre success). At the end, they deemed the standard Hellion into Marine/Tank/Medivac play to be much better. They need more buffs to be truly competitive. The current round of buffs might've helped, but still likely not to be enough.
Protoss upgrade costs (aside from Shields) did not need the reduction that they got. They already had the ability to speed up their upgrades, so what rationale could you have for giving them the cheapest upgrades across all 3 races? Even considering that they have the most dangerous deathball. It's like they WANTED to fuck Zergs over with this and make sure that at the very least they maintained an upgrade advantage over Terrans all game lone.
Changing Snipe modified an ability that had a RIDICULOUSLY high skill cap compared to anything else in the game. 6 Snipes to kill a Broodlord and 11 Snipes to kill an Ultralisk. Even considering you do things perfectly, how many people can fully utilize snipe in the same way Mvp did? Maybe taking away 10 damage, but taking away 20 was pretty extreme (44% of it's damage output, how many times do you see a nerf this extreme?).
With the larger maps, the Overlord change was warranted, but the Queen range buff? They said they were happy with the balance of the game and they do something that would drastically change the game. So clearly, they weren't happy with the work that the best Terrans had to do in order to get the results they did. They wanted more.
With the issue of the 1-1-1, Blizzard took a while, but at the very least they threw in a bunch of arbitrary buffs for Protoss and nerfs for Terran. In the end, I agree with the buff to Immortals (a bit borderline, but still agree). And now, long after these changes, the methods behind defending the 1-1-1 has been discovered. Even though they took a long time and didn't even need to do anything, they intervened for Protoss.
With the issue of the deathball, Infestors were buffed, and it destroyed the deathball as we knew it (then). It took a while, but it happened.
With the issue of Infestors, they got nerfed twice. It took a lot of EVERYONE saying that Infestors were broke, but it happened.
With the issue of the Zerg deathball (Infestor/Broodlord) against Terran, they said they would wait and give Terrans a time to figure something out. Terrans got better at Viking timings and experimented with Snipe. It took FOREVER before Blizzard ever did anything about the Zerg deathball. And guess what they did? THEY NERFED SNIPE! YEAH! They didn't help Terrans when they asked for help, they stabbed them in the back. They didn't get ANY buffs leading up to this. Instead, they got nerfs to the Barracks, blue flame, EMP radius, and Zerg got a buff to the Ultralisk. WTF?!
With the issue of the game being balanced, Blizzard complained to themselves that they felt the game was balanced, spectators complained that TvZ was too awesome to look at (until the player they liked lost). So what do they do? They throw in a 100% unnecessary and excessive buff to Queens. Not +1 range, but +2 range.
After 3 months, they declared that they would implement changes to help fix the game. A few weeks after, they say, "NOPE! You guys are fine! The game is balanced! Moving on!" We waited patiently everytime. We took the abuse up the ass. We adapted EVERY DAMN TIME. And what does Blizzard do? They nerf us. They ignore us. We don't usually ask for buffs. We've dealt with nerfs (some cried when mech TvT became weaker, but we realized that blue flame was too much against Zerg). We just kept playing the damn game.
And there's the issue that many diamond and masters Zergs go for the Roach/Bane bust and comment that they win nearly every game, if not every game, using that same build. Terrans have not complained about it (they might've quit the game because of it, given that I hardly see Terrans on the ladder anymore). Should something be done about it? If you gave a damn about 1-1-1, then yes. Will something be done about it? Probably not.
This shit didn't really happen in Broodwar. Something is broken? Let the players figure it out themselves. Something is broken in SC2? Does it involve Terran? NERF TERRAN! But it's the Terrans that need help? NERF THEM ANYWAY! Maybe they should've spent more time in the beta phase. Maybe they should've waited a longer time before they made the changes they constantly make. It's like they've gotten so used to intervening that they just got bored with patch 1.4.3 and decided to just throw something in.
I just wish that if they insist on constantly changing the game that they be fair about it. If not, then avoid changing the game altogether and let the players decide the metagame. Did they screw up with SC2? Yes. Was it as bad as everyone thought it was? Yes and no. Marauders weren't as insanely broke as many people thought they were, but the fact is Terran has more micro opportunity and it has a large affect on how games play out. Maybe we would've gotten to the same place if we just let the game be developed by the players. Yes, some things NEEDED to be changed (Stim timing, Archons to massive, and Warp Gate timing off the top of my head), but you can do that all at once when it's been globally deemed that these changes NEED to be made after the game becomes fully (or near fully) explored.
On September 04 2012 22:59 kyllinghest wrote: Nestea and Fruidealer won the first GSLs, perhaps its time to roll back the changes done to balance and maps?
As happy as many Terrans would be given the information they have now (and the fact that they were the ONLY race to get nerfs since and the other two races have only gotten buffs since then), that would be unfair to the other races. T.T Some of the changes were fully necessary to the game. SOME.
Again, I know you're joking...
On September 04 2012 22:50 DaRkVsLiGhT wrote: i will only use the raven if its speed is increased and its cost decreased
I'll only use it if the energy cost of Seeker Missile is reduced to 100 energy or less (75 would be nice) and goes to a range of 9. PDD and Auto Turret also needs a 2-3 casting range increase (area of the PDD itself is fine). The cost of the Raven itself is fine (could be less mineral intensive, but oh well). Terrans almost always float gas anyway in the late game. Raven cost isn't a problem. Speed is also fine. It's just the cast range that makes it terrible... And Seeker Missile needs another speed buff. It blows up your own units too... Sure, it can help kill Ultralisks quickly, but if used even a second too slowly, it could mean the death of many of your own units. I feel like Ghosts and Ravens should be the lategame focus of Terran...
Actually... In retrospect... I think reverting the patches, letting the players figure the game out for a year or two, then see which changes actually needed to be made. I feel like 5 rax reaper, Warp Gate timing, and Archons to Massive would be the obvious ones to keep. Stim at first seemed like something that needed to be changed, but that was when maps were crazy small. Maybe on these larger maps, it isn't as much of an issue. Honestly, how would the older patches (with a few key changes) function on the current maps. How would they function if we make the maps bigger? Is there any way we can make the maps crazy small and balance the game? How about a fully balanced game on a medium sized map that retains a mostly balanced game on larger maps and slightly smaller maps? Honestly Blizzard probably jumped the gun WAY too early in changing the game.
On September 05 2012 09:16 RyLai wrote: If you look at things objectively, it is impossible to say that this is anything other than unfair. The game has achieved relative balance a long time ago. They made so many changes that were unnecessary unless you inherently favored the other 2 races.
Warp Prism's never needed to be buffed. It was fine before. Does it really matter at this point? It's a little more annoying, but negligible. But the reasoning that they wanted players to use Warp Prisms more was just bad. Players were already using them.
The Barracks build time didn't really need the nerf. Zergs had already gotten good at defending 2 rax, making proxy rax the only thing to worry about on these larger maps.
The Raven buff was nice, but still insufficient. There were MANY Terrans practicing Raven styles (with mediocre success). At the end, they deemed the standard Hellion into Marine/Tank/Medivac play to be much better. They need more buffs to be truly competitive. The current round of buffs might've helped, but still likely not to be enough.
Protoss upgrade costs (aside from Shields) did not need the reduction that they got. They already had the ability to speed up their upgrades, so what rationale could you have for giving them the cheapest upgrades across all 3 races? Even considering that they have the most dangerous deathball. It's like they WANTED to fuck Zergs over with this and make sure that at the very least they maintained an upgrade advantage over Terrans all game lone.
Changing Snipe modified an ability that had a RIDICULOUSLY high skill cap compared to anything else in the game. 6 Snipes to kill a Broodlord and 11 Snipes to kill an Ultralisk. Even considering you do things perfectly, how many people can fully utilize snipe in the same way Mvp did? Maybe taking away 10 damage, but taking away 20 was pretty extreme (44% of it's damage output, how many times do you see a nerf this extreme?).
With the larger maps, the Overlord change was warranted, but the Queen range buff? They said they were happy with the balance of the game and they do something that would drastically change the game. So clearly, they weren't happy with the work that the best Terrans had to do in order to get the results they did. They wanted more.
With the issue of the 1-1-1, Blizzard took a while, but at the very least they threw in a bunch of arbitrary buffs for Protoss and nerfs for Terran. In the end, I agree with the buff to Immortals (a bit borderline, but still agree). And now, long after these changes, the methods behind defending the 1-1-1 has been discovered. Even though they took a long time and didn't even need to do anything, they intervened for Protoss.
With the issue of the deathball, Infestors were buffed, and it destroyed the deathball as we knew it (then). It took a while, but it happened.
With the issue of Infestors, they got nerfed twice. It took a lot of EVERYONE saying that Infestors were broke, but it happened.
With the issue of the Zerg deathball (Infestor/Broodlord) against Terran, they said they would wait and give Terrans a time to figure something out. Terrans got better at Viking timings and experimented with Snipe. It took FOREVER before Blizzard ever did anything about the Zerg deathball. And guess what they did? THEY NERFED SNIPE! YEAH! They didn't help Terrans when they asked for help, they stabbed them in the back. They didn't get ANY buffs leading up to this. Instead, they got nerfs to the Barracks, blue flame, EMP radius, and Zerg got a buff to the Ultralisk. WTF?!
With the issue of the game being balanced, Blizzard complained to themselves that they felt the game was balanced, spectators complained that TvZ was too awesome to look at (until the player they liked lost). So what do they do? They throw in a 100% unnecessary and excessive buff to Queens. Not +1 range, but +2 range.
After 3 months, they declared that they would implement changes to help fix the game. A few weeks after, they say, "NOPE! You guys are fine! The game is balanced! Moving on!" We waited patiently everytime. We took the abuse up the ass. We adapted EVERY DAMN TIME. And what does Blizzard do? They nerf us. They ignore us. We don't usually ask for buffs. We've dealt with nerfs (some cried when mech TvT became weaker, but we realized that blue flame was too much against Zerg). We just kept playing the damn game.
And there's the issue that many diamond and masters Zergs go for the Roach/Bane bust and comment that they win nearly every game, if not every game, using that same build. Terrans have not complained about it (they might've quit the game because of it, given that I hardly see Terrans on the ladder anymore). Should something be done about it? If you gave a damn about 1-1-1, then yes. Will something be done about it? Probably not.
This shit didn't really happen in Broodwar. Something is broken? Let the players figure it out themselves. Something is broken in SC2? Does it involve Terran? NERF TERRAN! But it's the Terrans that need help? NERF THEM ANYWAY! Maybe they should've spent more time in the beta phase. Maybe they should've waited a longer time before they made the changes they constantly make. It's like they've gotten so used to intervening that they just got bored with patch 1.4.3 and decided to just throw something in.
I just wish that if they insist on constantly changing the game that they be fair about it. If not, then avoid changing the game altogether and let the players decide the metagame. Did they screw up with SC2? Yes. Was it as bad as everyone thought it was? Yes and no. Marauders weren't as insanely broke as many people thought they were, but the fact is Terran has more micro opportunity and it has a large affect on how games play out. Maybe we would've gotten to the same place if we just let the game be developed by the players. Yes, some things NEEDED to be changed (Stim timing, Archons to massive, and Warp Gate timing off the top of my head), but you can do that all at once when it's been globally deemed that these changes NEED to be made after the game becomes fully (or near fully) explored.
Quoting for truth, excellent post. Albeit SC2 is the best balanced and probably only real competitive RTS right now, Blizzard could've made it so much better without all of the ridiculous overbuffing / overnerfing, especially favoring against Terran. Your point about warp prisms is a really good example - they didn't need the buff, they were already perfectly fine, but Protoss didn't use them because they didn't NEED to.
Obviously stuff like Reapers needed to be nerfed, but most things should've been left untouched (like the perfectly balanced snipe that required a ton of control and could only be utilized by top tier terrans to have an even footing in lategame TvZ).
EPT
As a Protoss I find it funny but yah... even the worse Terrans have figured it out since the initial patch at least
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/jsCXt.png)
![[image loading]](http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/4706/sandiegostan.png)
![[image loading]](http://i49.tinypic.com/za14p.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.qkme.me/3qqek8.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/maps/237_Fighting%20Spirit.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/images/maps/235_Match%20Point.jpg)
