|
On November 21 2012 15:53 Hall0wed wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 15:50 Tsubbi wrote:
So after protoss secured 3 of the top 4 spots in blizzard tournament we get a post that basically says:
"hey guys, winrates are eben but almost every protoss unit wont be effected by fungal, have a nice day"
how can they even remotely think that this is a small change? also why wouldnt they compensate for it if they see equal winrates? like removing hydra upgrade or making it scale better with attack upgrades..
the raven change is a good idea though You're going to need a MUCH Better argument than using the results of ONE tournament, a tournament where the 3 best players BY FAR happened to be Protoss so of course they got top 3. I fail to see how the most skilled players at an event placing the highest shows anything about balance.
well those players dominated the qualifiers as well, top8 in korea had 7 protoss
|
On November 21 2012 15:29 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 15:26 BoxingKangaroo wrote:On November 21 2012 15:11 Whitewing wrote:On November 21 2012 14:33 BoxingKangaroo wrote:On November 21 2012 14:16 Whitewing wrote:On November 21 2012 14:01 BoxingKangaroo wrote:On November 21 2012 13:42 Whitewing wrote:On November 21 2012 13:38 Protosnake wrote:On November 21 2012 13:33 aZealot wrote:On November 21 2012 13:11 Talack wrote:
[quote]
you're supposed to outplay them... : /
Like are zerg players THIS dependant on fungal now? I really don't think it's a balance issue rather than a complete crutch at this point they refuse to stop using. Yeah, I tend to agree. Months before Infestors became popular, you'd see good Zergs target firing Sentries and good Protoss doing their best to preserve them by getting them out of the front line. IMO, Zergs may have gotten lazy in the last few months. Now, this is not to say that Sentries may or may not be psionic. From a lore perspective, I think only HT, DT, Archon and Ghost fit that bill. But to object to this on the grounds that the Infestor and fungal no longer "counters" the Sentry is off, IMO. They are still doing it, but as mentionned here, above, and in another post on frontpage, Zerg micro is almost irrelevant, all they can do is taking advantage of a Protoss doing a mistake, mainly with his forcefield, when executed properly, Immortal-sentry is like a single-player experience, it do not fail You never see zerg going tunneling claws before roach speed, is that because it can't work or doesn't work, or because it hasn't been fully explored? Leenock has actually done 2 roach warren builds before to get both upgrades super fast for specific timings in Code S, that should be worth some exploration. Symbol has showcased builds where he gets super fast lair and overlord drops so he can roach bomb all over the immortal/sentry army and negate the sentries entirely. I don't think zerg micro is irrelevant, I think their strategy against the push is simply flawed. The usual method is to bash your head against a build purely designed to crush someone bashing their head against it. Hell, TLO has showcased a strategy that seems effective, he puts a bunch of spines up in his main by the ramp, makes a nydus worm, basetrades his enemy, and uses the nydus worm to retreat his army back to his main when the push comes up the ramp, using the combination of his army plus all the spines and the narrow choke that is the main ramp to crush the push, and then he's won. From a purely strategic standpoint, fighting the immortal sentry push head on without a way to bypass or ignore the forcefields is playing to the push's strengths. If that means zerg needs to stay on 2 bases a little longer and get the third at 6:00 instead of 4:00 so he can get a quicker gas, then so be it, that's a good thing for the matchup. The immortal sentry push is designed entirely as a response to a low gas/tech zerg who took a super fast 3rd and droned heavily. You can beat it simply by not doing that. Startale_Curious does a 2 base quicker gas build with a 6:00 third quite often in ZvP in code S. Think outside the box. You don't have to do the stephano build every game. Yeah going 2-hatch might mean the Toss doesn't choose the Immortal/Sentry build but that choice doesn't really affect them in a meaningful way (because 3-hatch is scouted so early) and yet leaves the Zerg a little behind economically. As a rule I hate any strat that means basetrade also. But you aren't behind economically, that's a misconception. You are behind economically compared to a gasless 3 base stephano style build, but you aren't behind compared to the protoss. You are trading a little bit of economy for tech, that's an even trade. Being behind is a commonly misused phrase. What it actually means is that, given your choice of strategy, you are behind where you should be due to a mistake you made or a well played move your opponent made that hindered you. Exchanging economy for tech does not put you behind, it puts you behind if you fail to make use of your advantage (which is in tech). A 6 minute third base with some earlier gas does mean you have fewer drones, but it isn't that much fewer that you're suddenly behind economically. It merely means your advantage isn't in the ability to produce tons of roaches, but rather to produce gas heavier units like infestors, mutalisks, or even hydralisks. You shouldn't hate basetrades on principle, it's one of zerg's strongest options. Whichever race has high dps fast units (zerglings!) should favor basetrades as a general rule. Refusing to consider it is handicapping yourself. You even have buildings that can move! Well it's a pretty widely held belief that Zerg needs to be 'up' - both on drones and on bases to be equal with Terran and Toss. I hate basetrades on principle yes. I don't care if they're strong for Zerg. Strength of a unit or strat in regards to your race shouldn't change what you think of them. Gotta stay objective. Well, that widely held belief has been shown to be wrong on multiple occasions, and remember, you're actually still up on bases and drones with protoss with a 6 minute third, just not AS up as you otherwise would be. You have a tech advantage compared to what you would otherwise have doing this, that advantage can be leveraged. And um... that's the opposite of staying objective. Objective: undistorted by emotion or personal bias My opinion on the stupidity of basetrades is objective, because I don't let the fact that they're strong for Zerg (and therefore make my ladder easier) cloud my opinion of them. Um, your opinion is subjective because you are letting the fact that you don't like them and think they are stupid prevent you from using a powerful tool your race has. Who gives a shit if it makes your ladder easier, are you actually taking a dump on tactics zergs use on a regular basis in tournaments to win? Terrans do it too once they realize they can't compete with broodlord/infestor (which is a slow composition and thus weak in a base trade). Base trades are perfectly valid and legitimate tactics, and often times the only viable tactic if your opponent forces it. Refusing to consider it because you don't like it is definitely subjective. You are letting your personal bias distort your use of tactics and strategies, that's in the definition you linked -_-.
Ok, I see where we're getting lines crossed. My mostly throwaway line about not liking basetrades was more about from a design and watching perspective than tactics one, in the same vein as when people say they dislike fungal root or warp gate. In other words, it seems silly to me that a game about building up armies to kill each other ends without the armies actually meeting. A game where that happens often wouldn't be a game I would enjoy very much.
It is objective to dislike a property of your race despite it's strength or overpoweredness. You can dislike fungal root even if it's one of Zerg's strengths for example. This is the point I was trying to make (I had thought you suggested that I should like basetrading because it's a strength of the race I play).
It is not objective to discount a strategy such as basetrading because you don't like it. (This is the point you were making, that I should consider basetrading strats even if I don't like them).
|
Anyone else find it ironic how Zerg think's that its okay that they should be able to retreat their Infestors away from any battle unscathed but find it atrociously imbalanced if Protoss can somehow manage to retain their expensive caster unit.
|
United States7483 Posts
On November 21 2012 15:52 BeeNu wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 14:32 Whitewing wrote:On November 21 2012 14:04 Protosnake wrote:On November 21 2012 13:42 Whitewing wrote:On November 21 2012 13:38 Protosnake wrote:On November 21 2012 13:33 aZealot wrote:On November 21 2012 13:11 Talack wrote:On November 21 2012 12:57 neoghaleon55 wrote:
so what's zerg suppose to do against sentry stalker 2,3 base allins now?
I'm really confused about this change. you're supposed to outplay them... : / Like are zerg players THIS dependant on fungal now? I really don't think it's a balance issue rather than a complete crutch at this point they refuse to stop using. Yeah, I tend to agree. Months before Infestors became popular, you'd see good Zergs target firing Sentries and good Protoss doing their best to preserve them by getting them out of the front line. IMO, Zergs may have gotten lazy in the last few months. Now, this is not to say that Sentries may or may not be psionic. From a lore perspective, I think only HT, DT, Archon and Ghost fit that bill. But to object to this on the grounds that the Infestor and fungal no longer "counters" the Sentry is off, IMO. They are still doing it, but as mentionned here, above, and in another post on frontpage, Zerg micro is almost irrelevant, all they can do is taking advantage of a Protoss doing a mistake, mainly with his forcefield, when executed properly, Immortal-sentry is like a single-player experience, it do not fail You never see zerg going tunneling claws before roach speed, is that because it can't work or doesn't work, or because it hasn't been fully explored? Leenock has actually done 2 roach warren builds before to get both upgrades super fast for specific timings in Code S, that should be worth some exploration. Symbol has showcased builds where he gets super fast lair and overlord drops so he can roach bomb all over the immortal/sentry army and negate the sentries entirely. I don't think zerg micro is irrelevant, I think their strategy against the push is simply flawed. The usual method is to bash your head against a build purely designed to crush someone bashing their head against it. Hell, TLO has showcased a strategy that seems effective, he puts a bunch of spines up in his main by the ramp, makes a nydus worm, basetrades his enemy, and uses the nydus worm to retreat his army back to his main when the push comes up the ramp, using the combination of his army plus all the spines and the narrow choke that is the main ramp to crush the push, and then he's won. From a purely strategic standpoint, fighting the immortal sentry push head on without a way to bypass or ignore the forcefields is playing to the push's strengths. If that means zerg needs to stay on 2 bases a little longer and get the third at 6:00 instead of 4:00 so he can get a quicker gas, then so be it, that's a good thing for the matchup. The immortal sentry push is designed entirely as a response to a low gas/tech zerg who took a super fast 3rd and droned heavily. You can beat it simply by not doing that. Startale_Curious does a 2 base quicker gas build with a 6:00 third quite often in ZvP in code S. Think outside the box. You don't have to do the stephano build every game. I've seen plenty of zerg attempt tunneling claws against immortal-sentry, it's been pretty heavily tested and what usually happen is that they just rolled the very risky dice of going burrow against Robo, because if any observer is there the roaches just get murdered by the immortal+Forcefield, tunneling below just make the fight much shorter. Baneling drop rarely come in time, can get countered by micro and above all allow a protoss with warp prism to just spam warp Zealot in mineral line and win the game, because there is no roach to defend. I'd love to see that TLO build where he manage to get 3 base, a spine wall, a nydus, an army, a nydus in his opponents base, then have the time to come back to defend the all-in Getting the 3rd at 6:00 is illogical, if the protoss doesnt scout a fast 3rd base he wont all-in, he's already ahead, all he have to do is play the safe macro game and just crush the Z mid game with a FF/colossus spam (Old time PvZ) Even if he's all-in it the zerg didnt gained many ways to deal with it, unless he went muta, the main reason why a Protoss dont go immortal-allin against a 2base Z So maybe there are mysterious timing that have not yet been explored, but they tried very hard and so far nothing did the job. I personally am convinced that nothing can stop this all-in in WoL, but swarm host can. Have you seen symbol do the roach drop? I'm not talking about a baneling drop, he doesn't get banelings, he skips them to get faster drops. He's showcased it in GSL a few times, he does a mass roach drop all over the toss army to negate the sentries entirely. The TLO build I'm referring to pulls all drones out of the third and natural (when the push is almost there, he doesn't do it super early) and doesn't even attempt to defend them, he actually spines his main base and sacrifices the natural and third to buy time. He puts the nydus network in his main and sends all his roaches immediately to his opponent's base as soon as the push moves out. If protoss doesn't turn around, he basetrades, busting down the nexii and crippling protoss enough. He builds the nydus worm to retreat after he's busted open the base, not before. He doesn't attack with the nydus, he builds it so his units can get back into his main. He builds a lot of spines in his main covering his ramp, and pulls his roaches out to fight at the ramp when protoss tries to bust up. What winds up happening is protoss has no economy and no production, and zerg has one mining base and units, along with tech. Getting the 3rd at 6:00 isn't illogical, you're making a choice to defeat a potential build. If, as you say, the immortal/sentry build is unstoppable, then THE ONLY logical choice is to force your opponent not to do it however possible, or lose 100% of your games where your opponent opts for the attack. You aren't behind at all, where is this ridiculous idea coming from? You are making an even trade: some economy and pure numbers for much stronger tech at a timing where tech wins and no tech loses. You'll be playing it out differently than you are used to, but you still have a 3rd base way before your opponent does and you're a lot safer, and you should still be ahead economically of your opponent. If the all-in is unbeatable as you say given the fast 3rd base, then don't do the fast third base! That's like protoss complaining that a nexus first build can't hold against a 6 pool, so 6 pool should be nerfed. Maybe your strategy choice is simply risky, and your opponent has a build designed to punish that risk. The fact of the matter is, you can limit your opponent's choices with your own choices. If you invest in fast zergling speed, your opponent can't move out at all until he can combat your zerglings and defend against a counter attack: that limits him. If you invest in mutalisks, your opponent can't move out of his bases at all until he can win a base trade by defending the mutas while also being strong enough to crush your whole army combined due to your mobility advantage. This limits your opponent. Why is teching a little earlier and taking a third a little later thought of so heinously? A 6:00 third is still quick. Remember, stephano designed this build back before people were doing immortal/sentry pushes. Immortal/sentry was designed to kill a gasless 3rd, so if you're so concerned about the push, don't do a gasless third. I feel fairly certain that the Immortal Sentry build existed quite some time before Stephano's mass roaches became popular. It was originally made to kill Zerg before they could get a decent number of Infestors or Mutas I think and it hits at a pretty scary fast timing. Doing drops with Roaches can work in theory I dunno, I've tried using Bane drops before and it's been difficult to get a large enough ground army plus banelings and overlord speed and drop tech in time to defend properly. If Zerg have to blindly change up their openings due to the metagame that's fine but I'd be curious to know exactly what build Zerg can utilize which will effectively crush an Immortal/Sentry all-in because I still don't know what that build that actually is.
Immortal/sentry composition existed but it wasn't used as an all-in due to it's general weakness against 2 base builds. It didn't hit in time with sufficient force against 2 base builds to actually counter the tech, and 2 base fast tech builds often built a lot of spine crawlers. While it existed it was very uncommon, and it certainly wasn't the 3 immortal then WP with lots of sentries and 7 gates that we see now. That particular build is designed to hit a very specific timing against a gasless 3rd.
|
Canada16217 Posts
On November 21 2012 11:12 Torte de Lini wrote:
I like the HSM upgrade, might be a bit too much to be honest.
But the Infestor change is pretty neat, but I wish they improved neural parasite instead.
they plan to remove neural parasite db said in his bwc interview if i remember correctly
|
I am just laughing now.
The Immortal/Sentry will literally be impossible to stop if you go standard 3 hatch build.
Maybe some gimmicky 2 base baneling drops or something.
They must get rid of Warp Prism,Sentry and DT psionic attributes.
Then it will be a decent change.
Happy that Terran got a buff.
|
On November 21 2012 15:54 Tsubbi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 15:53 Hall0wed wrote:On November 21 2012 15:50 Tsubbi wrote:
So after protoss secured 3 of the top 4 spots in blizzard tournament we get a post that basically says:
"hey guys, winrates are eben but almost every protoss unit wont be effected by fungal, have a nice day"
how can they even remotely think that this is a small change? also why wouldnt they compensate for it if they see equal winrates? like removing hydra upgrade or making it scale better with attack upgrades..
the raven change is a good idea though You're going to need a MUCH Better argument than using the results of ONE tournament, a tournament where the 3 best players BY FAR happened to be Protoss so of course they got top 3. I fail to see how the most skilled players at an event placing the highest shows anything about balance. well those players dominated the qualifiers as well, top8 in korea had 7 protoss
Go look at the games and find me a match where Protoss wins past 15 minutes, Protoss was simply abusing Immortal Sentry for the most part. (Stopping this push has been largely figured out at this point)
Terran and Protoss are occasionally doing well in tournaments, the recurring theme here is that Zerg almost winning everything and getting consistent finishes no matter what player pool.
|
On November 21 2012 15:58 Astro-Penguin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 15:54 Tsubbi wrote:On November 21 2012 15:53 Hall0wed wrote:On November 21 2012 15:50 Tsubbi wrote:
So after protoss secured 3 of the top 4 spots in blizzard tournament we get a post that basically says:
"hey guys, winrates are eben but almost every protoss unit wont be effected by fungal, have a nice day"
how can they even remotely think that this is a small change? also why wouldnt they compensate for it if they see equal winrates? like removing hydra upgrade or making it scale better with attack upgrades..
the raven change is a good idea though You're going to need a MUCH Better argument than using the results of ONE tournament, a tournament where the 3 best players BY FAR happened to be Protoss so of course they got top 3. I fail to see how the most skilled players at an event placing the highest shows anything about balance. well those players dominated the qualifiers as well, top8 in korea had 7 protoss Go look at the games and find me a match where Protoss wins past 15 minutes, Protoss was simply abusing Immortal Sentry for the most part. (Stopping this push has been largely figured out at this point)Terran and Protoss are occasionally doing well in tournaments, the recurring theme here is that Zerg almost winning everything and getting consistent finishes no matter what player pool.
Since when has this push been figured out?
It is like the new 1/1/1.
|
On November 21 2012 15:57 FakeDeath wrote:
I am just laughing now.
The Immortal/Sentry will literally impossible to stop if you go standard 3 hatch build.
Maybe some gimmicky 2 base baneling drops or something.
They must get rid of Warp Prism,Sentry and DT psionic attributes.
Then it will be a decent change.
Happy that Terran got a buff.
Nah, DT are fine, if you can build infestors, you can build Overseer too. Thing is it will open more toss strats, however, i definetely agree that warp prisms immune to fungal are a joke. And these changes doesnt help on already super effective immortal push.
|
On November 21 2012 15:59 FakeDeath wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 15:58 Astro-Penguin wrote:On November 21 2012 15:54 Tsubbi wrote:On November 21 2012 15:53 Hall0wed wrote:On November 21 2012 15:50 Tsubbi wrote:
So after protoss secured 3 of the top 4 spots in blizzard tournament we get a post that basically says:
"hey guys, winrates are eben but almost every protoss unit wont be effected by fungal, have a nice day"
how can they even remotely think that this is a small change? also why wouldnt they compensate for it if they see equal winrates? like removing hydra upgrade or making it scale better with attack upgrades..
the raven change is a good idea though You're going to need a MUCH Better argument than using the results of ONE tournament, a tournament where the 3 best players BY FAR happened to be Protoss so of course they got top 3. I fail to see how the most skilled players at an event placing the highest shows anything about balance. well those players dominated the qualifiers as well, top8 in korea had 7 protoss Go look at the games and find me a match where Protoss wins past 15 minutes, Protoss was simply abusing Immortal Sentry for the most part. (Stopping this push has been largely figured out at this point)Terran and Protoss are occasionally doing well in tournaments, the recurring theme here is that Zerg almost winning everything and getting consistent finishes no matter what player pool. Since when has this push been figured out? It is like the new 1/1/1.
Parting lost one game with it (because of poor sentry control IMO) so everything thinks it's done.
|
Right, so i tried this out about an hour ago, and although i didn't play a zerg and can't comment on the fungal changes i can comment on the raven changes. Personally, i'm not a big fan of the raven change in its current state. This may be because of the lack of builds that actually incorporate the raven as much as zerg uses infestors or protoss uses high templar. The Raven had limited uses, and the only game in which it was effective was a late game tvt, where we would have already had time to research the upgrades and such.
Note: THIS IS MY OPINION.
The biggest problem that i faced was actually getting up the ravens, as once i did and my opponent did in the tvt, it made for an epic splits and engagements. As we agreed no rush 10 minutes, it was fine, but hunter seeker missile is just not as good early game against bio centric play, but it does destroy late game bcs pretty well hahaha as we all know.
Bottom line: the biggest problem wasn't the effectiveness of the raven once we got 5-6 out, but getting them out was a pain. Unlike protoss and zerg, we can't make 50 of them at once (yes yes, warp in/larvae imba), but the point is, the raven is a LATE GAME Unit. I don't see, and once again this is my humble opinion, its effectiveness in non-late game battles beyond vs early stalker heavy protoss and meching terrans. I would like to see something like either decreasing its build time or decreasing its costs to balance out the fact that terrans can't make many at once without heavily investing in starports, which would only come at the end of games-----> time to research the upgrades.
So, in conclusion: the raven is not going to become a central unit, as teching to it is one of the most riskiest things you can do. it only counters air, and even with no-resarching hunter seeker missile upgrade it still doesn't really work in the early game. Now, this might change, as us terrans get better at using them and someone creates a raven centric build that can survive mid-game pressure, but beyond late game engagements, and detection of units( which is useful, but goes back to the point that ravens will never ever ever become a core unit even in its changed state), getting up any amount of ravens is a signficant investment that does not fill the roll of keeping you safe while you tech. You tech towards ravens.... and what do you do in tvz when your opponent goes mass ultralisks? i would rather see blizzard focus on on improving other units, but i have no idea which. (perhaps adding 45 snipe to the ghosts, but only versus ground?)
Anyways, please don't give me too much trash, these are my observations, and could change at any given moment.
|
On November 21 2012 15:57 FakeDeath wrote:
I am just laughing now.
The Immortal/Sentry will literally be impossible to stop if you go standard 3 hatch build.
Maybe some gimmicky 2 base baneling drops or something.
They must get rid of Warp Prism,Sentry and DT psionic attributes.
Then it will be a decent change.
Happy that Terran got a buff.
Honestly the fact that Zerg is able to get away with this standard 3 Hatch build is rather atrocious to me, being able to simply recycle the same build orders over and over is saddening. Protoss and Terran cannot hope to face Zerg head on using the same build every game, we have to try and change it up and hope we catch you off guard here and then by somehow manging to deny your scouting. Zerg can simply do the same bloody thing every game and go unpunished if they make no mistakes. I would have no problem with 3 Hatch if Protoss could rebuttal it by doing a similar solid macro style that doesn't rely on gimmicks much like PvT can currently function.
|
On November 21 2012 15:59 NightOfTheDead wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 15:57 FakeDeath wrote:
I am just laughing now.
The Immortal/Sentry will literally impossible to stop if you go standard 3 hatch build.
Maybe some gimmicky 2 base baneling drops or something.
They must get rid of Warp Prism,Sentry and DT psionic attributes.
Then it will be a decent change.
Happy that Terran got a buff. Nah, DT are fine, if you can build infestors, you can build Overseer too. Thing is it will open more toss strats, however, i definetely agree that warp prisms immune to fungal are a joke. And these changes doesnt help on already super effective immortal push.
I really want to play Toss if this change goes through, their harassment options are insane now, and I think it fits my style better. Honestly I'm hoping that this just forces Zerg's to tighten up their play a bit and everyone's play overall just gets better.
|
United States7483 Posts
On November 21 2012 16:00 BoxingKangaroo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 15:59 FakeDeath wrote:On November 21 2012 15:58 Astro-Penguin wrote:On November 21 2012 15:54 Tsubbi wrote:On November 21 2012 15:53 Hall0wed wrote:On November 21 2012 15:50 Tsubbi wrote:
So after protoss secured 3 of the top 4 spots in blizzard tournament we get a post that basically says:
"hey guys, winrates are eben but almost every protoss unit wont be effected by fungal, have a nice day"
how can they even remotely think that this is a small change? also why wouldnt they compensate for it if they see equal winrates? like removing hydra upgrade or making it scale better with attack upgrades..
the raven change is a good idea though You're going to need a MUCH Better argument than using the results of ONE tournament, a tournament where the 3 best players BY FAR happened to be Protoss so of course they got top 3. I fail to see how the most skilled players at an event placing the highest shows anything about balance. well those players dominated the qualifiers as well, top8 in korea had 7 protoss Go look at the games and find me a match where Protoss wins past 15 minutes, Protoss was simply abusing Immortal Sentry for the most part. (Stopping this push has been largely figured out at this point)Terran and Protoss are occasionally doing well in tournaments, the recurring theme here is that Zerg almost winning everything and getting consistent finishes no matter what player pool. Since when has this push been figured out? It is like the new 1/1/1. Parting lost one game with it (because of poor sentry control IMO) so everything thinks it's done.
He's lost more than one, Suppy beat him when he did it, he lost to Sniper in GSL with it, and he's the best in the world at it. Frankly, I think if he'd had better zerg opponents in the tournament he'd have lost. TLO has won a number of games against the immortal/sentry all-in using his fairly unique strategy.
I wouldn't say it's figured out yet, but it's getting there quickly.
|
My first impression is that I actually like the very big but specific change to Fungal Growth a lot although I don't see why Warp Prisms are considered Psionic when they don't have energy while Medivacs do and are not considered Psionic.
I think I'd prefer it still affected WPs and medivacs. I'd like to see how this will play out.
SM change will still cost 125 energy, so it might be fair to do this, I'm not sure I'll agree with it in the end, but again, I'd like to see how this will play out.
|
Russian Federation216 Posts
On November 21 2012 15:50 Tsubbi wrote:
So after protoss secured 3 of the top 4 spots in blizzard tournament we get a post that basically says:
It was koreans against non-koreans....
|
On November 21 2012 15:50 Tsubbi wrote:
So after protoss secured 3 of the top 4 spots in blizzard tournament we get a post that basically says:
"hey guys, winrates are eben but almost every protoss unit wont be effected by fungal, have a nice day"
how can they even remotely think that this is a small change? also why wouldnt they compensate for it if they see equal winrates? like removing hydra upgrade or making it scale better with attack upgrades..
the raven change is a good idea though
How can you even think that WCS championships was even remotely a good representation of the best players in the world? You really think there would have been that many NA/SEA players if there wasn't a limit on the number of korean players?
C'mon man really...
|
On November 21 2012 16:03 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 16:00 BoxingKangaroo wrote:On November 21 2012 15:59 FakeDeath wrote:On November 21 2012 15:58 Astro-Penguin wrote:On November 21 2012 15:54 Tsubbi wrote:On November 21 2012 15:53 Hall0wed wrote:On November 21 2012 15:50 Tsubbi wrote:
So after protoss secured 3 of the top 4 spots in blizzard tournament we get a post that basically says:
"hey guys, winrates are eben but almost every protoss unit wont be effected by fungal, have a nice day"
how can they even remotely think that this is a small change? also why wouldnt they compensate for it if they see equal winrates? like removing hydra upgrade or making it scale better with attack upgrades..
the raven change is a good idea though You're going to need a MUCH Better argument than using the results of ONE tournament, a tournament where the 3 best players BY FAR happened to be Protoss so of course they got top 3. I fail to see how the most skilled players at an event placing the highest shows anything about balance. well those players dominated the qualifiers as well, top8 in korea had 7 protoss Go look at the games and find me a match where Protoss wins past 15 minutes, Protoss was simply abusing Immortal Sentry for the most part. (Stopping this push has been largely figured out at this point)Terran and Protoss are occasionally doing well in tournaments, the recurring theme here is that Zerg almost winning everything and getting consistent finishes no matter what player pool. Since when has this push been figured out? It is like the new 1/1/1. Parting lost one game with it (because of poor sentry control IMO) so everything thinks it's done. He's lost more than one, Suppy beat him when he did it, he lost to Sniper in GSL with it, and he's the best in the world at it. Frankly, I think if he'd had better zerg opponents in the tournament he'd have lost. TLO has won a number of games against the immortal/sentry all-in using his fairly unique strategy. I wouldn't say it's figured out yet, but it's getting there quickly.
Suppy blinded countered it.He already expected it and just went straight infestors into building 15 spines or so.
Had Parting just backed off and take a 3rd and transitioned into a 3 base pre-hive timing.
He would have crushed Suppy since Suppy invested a tons of minerals into defense and his drone count is not optimal.
The games against Sniper was one of the rare moments where Parting fucked up his sentry control.
(Usually Parting doesn't miss forcefields).
|
I don't really understand why Ravens and Overseer ain'"t psionic but heh
|
Sentry and warp prisim not psionic please.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
