|
On November 21 2012 16:35 Grimmyman123 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 16:32 m0ck wrote:On November 21 2012 16:31 Astro-Penguin wrote:On November 21 2012 16:13 FakeDeath wrote:On November 21 2012 16:08 Astro-Penguin 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. Honestly I would love to see an Immortal/Sentry nerf, maybe then Blizzard would take action after seeing the PvZ winrates skew down to unacceptable levels. Seeing as how Blizzard is unable to comprehend anything beyond win percentages it's probably the best course of action for the longevity of the game. They can't nerfed the Immortal/Sentry since they are crucial for P early-game wise for defense. They should just redesign the Infestor and Sentry and Mothership since these 3 are the core problems of PvZ. This would fucked up PvT but they must try to experiment it out. Blizz can't make the hard decision and just take the easy way out. I agree entirely man on every point you've made. A hero unit has no place in a game like SC2, nor do spells like Fungal which almost entirely prohibit micro (FF to a lesser degree as well). Infestor seems to be just a huge band aid to make Zerg viable and sadly enough it's surpassed doing just that by a great margin. The Infestor right now pretty much a solution to anything Protoss or Terran can throw at a Zerg. Please scale back your whining/trolling Actually, he's got a bit of a point. What is the counter to the Immortal Sentry all in? wInfestors and a well placed fungal. Just give it time, zerg will figure out a rush build to get 1 or 2 wInfestors out to fungal the sentries. Then the zerglings can clean up the mess.
Zerg are already realizing how good quick upgrades are when paired with relatively cheap units, And my whine is warranted at least from my own perspective as I grind out at least 600-700 games a season vs high master opponents. (I'm pretty much able to beat Terran and Protoss confidently but surprise surprise, I lose most often to Zerg just like almost every other Protoss and Terran out there.)
|
On November 21 2012 15:51 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 15:47 Novalisk wrote:
In what world does a biological attack not work against stuff with psychic capabilities?
Come on Blizzard, even X-Men wouldn't get away with this shit. How does the hellbat being biological make sense either? How come the sentry and the queen are psionic but the raven isn't? It's a game, not everything has to make sense.
Those don't really make sense, but at least they're reasonable and/or not very noticeable.
|
United States7483 Posts
On November 21 2012 16:07 FakeDeath wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 16:03 Whitewing wrote: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).
Suppy didn't blind counter it, he even has said as much in one of the threads here (do a search for superiorwolf and you'll find the posts). He counted the probes at the right timing and knew it was coming: that's not a blind counter, and if parting had pulled back his bad probe count would have left Suppy still ahead.
|
Warning: this post is long. Very long. If you don't like walls of text, skip this post.
Analysis of the Raven buff
The change to HSM has two different effects- it saves time and it saves resources. I'm going to look into just how much benefit a Terran actually gains from this in regards to each element separately.
Starting with the resources, take the cost of the research- 150/150. Because the research affects all Ravens you make, if you only make one Raven in a game, you save 150/150 resources per Raven made. If you make 6 Ravens over the course of the game, then you save 25/25 per Raven made. If you make 25 Ravens over the course of the game, you save a mere 7 minerals/gas per Raven. This means that in a late-game situation where a Terran is likely to be floating several thousand gas, they now get a marginally cheaper Raven. The longer the game goes on, and the more Ravens that are made, the more trivial this buff becomes. Clearly this isn't going to make any sort of difference in terms of a late-game economy. The greatest effect this buff has, in terms of resources, is in the mid-game where resources are your biggest constraint.
Now, for the buff in regards to saving time, I'm going to make a few assumptions for a pro Terran (this means that stupid mistakes, such as forgetting upgrades, are not made). The first is that the Corvid Reactor upgrade is researched before the first Raven is built, and that the production of the first Raven is timed so that the first Raven pops immediately following completion of Corvid Reactor. Lastly, assume that the research of HSM (in terms of time) only provides a constraint to the first Raven(s).
Keep in mind that, in terms of time, HSM has two requirements in order to be used- the research time of the upgrade and energy (which is generated over time). Also, because we assumed that the Raven has Corvid Reactor and pops with 75 energy, the Raven must wait a total of 89 seconds for the energy to cast HSM (125 energy total - 75 starting energy = 50 energy. 50 energy / 0.5625 energy per second = 89 seconds to gain 50 energy).
So now that the assumptions have been made, there are two possible cases- (1) the Terran has only one Starport (and thus upgrade research conflicts), or (2) the Terran has multiple Starports (and research does not conflict).
Case 1: The Terran has only one Starport (aka the worst possible case)
HSM research requires 110 seconds. A Raven requires 89 seconds to generate the energy required. Because HSM is assumed to be queued immediately after Corvid Reactor, there is a 21 second window where the only constraint is HSM research finishing. Therefore, by not requiring HSM to be researched, HSM can hit the field 21 seconds faster.
+ Show Spoiler +Just as an aside, the only time it makes sense to NOT research Corvid Reactor is if you are using an all-in timing involving a single Raven. Corvid Reactor has a research time of 110 seconds, and must be queued 50 seconds before the first Raven is queued to take effect. This means that you spend 50 seconds of idle Starport time to get a 25 energy bonus. That 25 energy would take 44 seconds to generate, meaning you spend 150/150 to lose 6 seconds on your push time. In any other case, you should research it.
Case 2: The Terran has multiple Starports (aka a much more likely case)
However, if the Terran has multiple Starports making Ravens, HSM can be researched at the same time as Corvid Reactor and the production of the actual Raven. Since Ravens require 60 seconds build time + 89 seconds to gain the energy required, it takes 149 seconds from the moment the Raven is queued before the energy restraint can be met. HSM takes only 110 seconds. Therefore, if Corvid Reactor and HSM can be researched concurrently, the buff to HSM has zero effect on how early HSM can possibly hit the field.
Conclusion:
Masters+:
You save miniscule amounts of resources per Raven in a late-game transition, and HSM will not be ready any faster if you create more than one Starport (read: there is NO benefit). If you wish to make use of this buff, use (1) very few Ravens, as the cost per Raven will significantly cheaper, and (2) only use one Starport to begin Raven production. Otherwise, you will not notice any difference between the test map and normal ladder games.
Everyone else:
You don't have to worry about getting the upgrade, potentially losing you the game. Other than that, you will not notice any difference whatsoever.
|
Blizzard doesnt like to make up new "quirky" rules for specific units, so now we are seing all psionic units being affected. Helping out hts/ghosts vs infestors and making mothership immune to neural (rightfully so) has now led to senties taking 0 dmg from fungal, and warp prisms not being fungable. That seems a bit uncalled for. But im not too concerned because sentries have the biggest impact before fungal is out on the map anyways.
Like someone pointed out though, dts not being releaved by fungal is a good example of what blizzard dont like to do (as in, having exceptions in broad "rules").
Im a zerg player and i were hoping for an infestor nerf that also makes them less powerfull in z v z, so im not too happy about this. A fungal projectile would have been a lot better. But this is only a first step and we might see a different nerf as time goes on.
|
United States7483 Posts
On November 21 2012 16:47 Richard Nixon wrote:Warning: this post is long. Very long. If you don't like walls of text, skip this post.Analysis of the Raven buffThe change to HSM has two different effects- it saves time and it saves resources. I'm going to look into just how much benefit a Terran actually gains from this in regards to each element separately. Starting with the resources, take the cost of the research- 150/150. Because the research affects all Ravens you make, if you only make one Raven in a game, you save 150/150 resources per Raven made. If you make 6 Ravens over the course of the game, then you save 25/25 per Raven made. If you make 25 Ravens over the course of the game, you save a mere 7 minerals/gas per Raven. This means that in a late-game situation where a Terran is likely to be floating several thousand gas, they now get a marginally cheaper Raven. The longer the game goes on, and the more Ravens that are made, the more trivial this buff becomes. Clearly this isn't going to make any sort of difference in terms of a late-game economy. The greatest effect this buff has, in terms of resources, is in the mid-game where resources are your biggest constraint. Now, for the buff in regards to saving time, I'm going to make a few assumptions for a pro Terran (this means that stupid mistakes, such as forgetting upgrades, are not made). The first is that the Corvid Reactor upgrade is researched before the first Raven is built, and that the production of the first Raven is timed so that the first Raven pops immediately following completion of Corvid Reactor. Lastly, assume that the research of HSM (in terms of time) only provides a constraint to the first Raven(s). Keep in mind that, in terms of time, HSM has two requirements in order to be used- the research time of the upgrade and energy (which is generated over time). Also, because we assumed that the Raven has Corvid Reactor and pops with 75 energy, the Raven must wait a total of 89 seconds for the energy to cast HSM (125 energy total - 75 starting energy = 50 energy. 50 energy / 0.5625 energy per second = 89 seconds to gain 50 energy). So now that the assumptions have been made, there are two possible cases- (1) the Terran has only one Starport (and thus upgrade research conflicts), or (2) the Terran has multiple Starports (and research does not conflict). Case 1: The Terran has only one Starport (aka the worst possible case)HSM research requires 110 seconds. A Raven requires 89 seconds to generate the energy required. Because HSM is assumed to be queued immediately after Corvid Reactor, there is a 21 second window where the only constraint is HSM research finishing. Therefore, by not requiring HSM to be researched, HSM can hit the field 21 seconds faster. + Show Spoiler +Just as an aside, the only time it makes sense to NOT research Corvid Reactor is if you are using an all-in timing involving a single Raven. Corvid Reactor has a research time of 110 seconds, and must be queued 50 seconds before the first Raven is queued to take effect. This means that you spend 50 seconds of idle Starport time to get a 25 energy bonus. That 25 energy would take 44 seconds to generate, meaning you spend 150/150 to lose 6 seconds on your push time. In any other case, you should research it. However, if the Terran has multiple Starports making Ravens, HSM can be researched at the same time as Corvid Reactor and the production of the actual Raven. Since Ravens require 60 seconds build time + 89 seconds to gain the energy required, it takes 149 seconds from the moment the Raven is queued before the energy restraint can be met. HSM takes only 110 seconds. Therefore, if Corvid Reactor and HSM can be researched concurrently, the buff to HSM has zero effect on how early HSM can possibly hit the field. Conclusion: Masters+:You save miniscule amounts of resources per Raven in a late-game transition, and HSM will not be ready any faster if you create more than one Starport (read: there is NO benefit). If you wish to make use of this buff, use (1) very few Ravens, as the cost per Raven will significantly cheaper, and (2) only use one Starport to begin Raven production. Otherwise, you will not notice any difference between the test map and normal ladder games. Everyone else:You don't have to worry about getting the upgrade, potentially losing you the game. Other than that, you will not notice any difference whatsoever.
The primary purpose of a tiny buff like this is generally to get people to pay attention to the unit and the spell for a while, and play with it. The goal isn't to provide a real buff, but to see if people can discover new things to do with the unit and spell.
|
Yea sure... "let's make zerg die to every sentry, speed wp play! that should balance it"
I doubt this goes live..
|
Infestors still deny every HSM Terrans ever try to cast so not like it changes anything.
|
lowering the raven build time would do a ton..
|
The Seeker Missile change is super sweet! Time to get back to playing :p
|
Maybe sentries being immune to fungal will mean that zergs have to play less greedy before broods, thus making zerg late game less strong in general which in turn will mean the late game will be fine?
Just an idea, remember that this is a complex games where different changes affect everything, because of the way the games are played out.
|
On November 21 2012 16:44 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 16:07 FakeDeath wrote:On November 21 2012 16:03 Whitewing wrote: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). Suppy didn't blind counter it, he even has said as much in one of the threads here (do a search for superiorwolf and you'll find the posts). He counted the probes at the right timing and knew it was coming: that's not a blind counter, and if parting had pulled back his bad probe count would have left Suppy still ahead.
Nah, he did blind counter it.
What he said:
"What I did is not blind. You can tell if it's a robo expand or a robo sentry immortal all in based on if they stop making probes at 7:45. "
Suppy vs Parting VOD: http://us.battle.net/bwc/en/tournaments/sc2/videos?page=6
He scouts at 7:30 and already is going up to 6 gas with lair before he is able to see any kind of probe count or if probe production stopped. Then, beyond this, Parting is still making probes when his OL scout peeks and and dies. If what Suppy says is true, then what he saw was not an immortal/sentry all in because of this. Despite that fact, he still gets ling speed, all 6 gases, +1 carapace then starts up 10 spines before he even sees the push start to move out (though the 10 spines could be a safe assumption as he did see the robo by that time). He even goes up to 6 gases, lair and evo before he is able to see probe counts or any tech.
|
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.
Rubbish. Plenty of top Korean players (Creator, MC, Hero etc.) have lost trying to do it. An all-in that only one player has been able to pull of consistently is a far cry from 1-1-1. Also Parting didn't use it once against Hyun in six fight club games. If it were auto-win why the hell would he not even try it? I bet you a player of Hyun's caliber has it figured out already, which is why Parting didn't try it. It looked bad when Sen lost to it three times in WSC for sure, but you have to remember even though Sen is good, he's not code S level. Protoss have been using it more out of desperation than anything, because late game PvZ is so hard to win now.
|
On November 21 2012 17:00 Ogww wrote:
Infestors still deny every HSM Terrans ever try to cast so not like it changes anything.
Ravens are psionic units, are they not?
|
On November 21 2012 17:13 tomatriedes 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. Rubbish. Plenty of top Korean players (Creator, MC, Hero etc.) have lost trying to do it. An all-in that only one player has been able to pull of consistently is a far cry from 1-1-1. Also Parting didn't use it once against Hyun in six fight club games. If it were auto-win why the hell would he not even try it? I bet you a player of Hyun's caliber has it figured out already, which is why Parting didn't try it. It looked bad when Sen lost to it three times in WSC for sure, but you have to remember even though Sen is good, he's not code S level. Protoss have been using it more out of desperation than anything, because late game PvZ is so hard to win now.
People were having issues with 1-1-1 long before pros were using the strategy in tournament games. Also, pros tend to not use one strategy unless they are bitbybit
|
the changes are all good, but I hope the projectile fungal doesn't get to implementation since the psionic upgrade is already very good and other zerg units are not compensated with better features ^_^
|
I assume this means infestors can't detect DT now, and speed prisms will be unkillable...
Most likely will see a different infestor nerf implemented.
|
On November 21 2012 17:14 tomatriedes wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2012 17:00 Ogww wrote:
Infestors still deny every HSM Terrans ever try to cast so not like it changes anything. Ravens are psionic units, are they not?
No.
The only terran unit that is psionic is ghost.
|
Imo: Psionic units should still take damage/be revealed, it should only negate the movement impairment. Also in my humble opinion Warp Prisms should not be psionic.
|
lol Blizzard trolling all infestor haters by going completely overboard with fungal nerf and then just revert it back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
