|
I feel like the mech upgrade change is unnecessary and takes away from the idea of making sure the units themselves are good enough, at least in this case (mech units). We are seeing two mech balance changes below that should be for the best though, so at least they're considering pushing them through even with the upgrade change, which is a relief, because I was very afraid that the upgrade change would discourage them from bothering with actual unit changes.
Still Thumbs Down from me.
Widow mine splash radius decrease might be too harsh, they could take it down to something like 1.35 and that would be a tad less harsh but still a huge change. Remember, it changes in two dimensions, so it (1.75->1.1) is about a 60% drop in area of effect, whereas 1.75->1.35 would be around a 40% drop in area of effect.
Nevertheless, I like the idea behind the change, so I voted Thumbs Up.
Siege tank attack cooldown decrease is not too drastic so I agree with it.
Oracle change = no.
I'm not sure cost is the issue, personally. I still don't really see Protosses use revelation much unless into the very late game.
Dark Templar movement speed increased from 2.813 to 3.375
Actually I like this personally. I don't play terran, but personally, I know how to build turrets and have an actual army. *Shrug* Some people rely on scans with greedy play too much and this helps that to be punished. I think it should be good for gameplay.
Roach speed upgrade also increases the burrowed roach movement speed from 1.41 to 2.25:
Excellent. You tried to encourage Tunnelling Claws in the past I think, but it was hard to make trying to hit a good timing worthwhile.
|
On September 24 2013 18:09 NarutO wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2013 18:07 saddaromma wrote:On September 24 2013 18:00 vthree wrote:On September 24 2013 17:54 saddaromma wrote:On September 24 2013 17:46 vthree wrote:On September 24 2013 17:38 saddaromma wrote:On September 24 2013 17:28 NarutO wrote:On September 24 2013 17:19 saddaromma wrote:On September 24 2013 17:11 NarutO wrote:On September 24 2013 17:09 Sabu113 wrote:
[quote]
How you have fallen Naruto. It's pretty sad. You can explain why, otherwise its pretty meaningless. If 7 second place finishes and 3 tournament wins in premier is winning nothing, I will take it back obviously! I can try to explain. Protoss won 3 out of 18 last premier tournaments, which are WCS EU, WCS AM and Dreamhack, not the biggest tournaments as WCS(final) or WCS KR. Terran won 10 and zerg 5. And yet you continously provide disguised information than balance is totally ok. Not that I say these numbers mean much, afterall maybe bomber,taeja and inno are that good. But fact is, your way of discussing and presenting data leaves not the very best impressions. Do you believe all Protoss that made it to the finals, lost due to balance reasons? Do you seriously consider Rain vs Maru a balance-issue? Rain was up 2-0 and also had the 3rd game won, he choked and threw it away. After that it went downhill. You argue that WCS EU Finals and Dreamhack are no big tournaments, then I might as well point out that Terran also won a WCS Eu premier and a Dreamhack as well as an IEM - are those not the biggest tournaments as well then? I don't know how you can look at the winner and the winner only - it makes no sense. Protoss is not extinct in finals, actually they are very well represented. From 18 tournaments we had 9 tournaments with a Protoss in the final. 3 times winning, one time it was a PvP final. We had Terrans in the final 12 times, winning 10. We had Zergs in the final 12 times, winning 5. While I believe the won tournaments by Terran clearly exceed the tournament winnings of Protoss and Zerg, I don't believe this is due to balance. If you look at the final games, you can usually explain a loss and in addition it can be a lot "worse" on paper if you simply point out win/loss. As explained at the example of Rain, he could have been up 3-0 and even if he would have lost, it would have been a 3-4. Is a 3-4 in the finals sign of imbalance? I dare to say no. There were only 2 protoss players in final since June, in Asus Rog and IEM (again, not the very best tournaments). Both lost. Taking into account that meta got figured out and dusts are kinda settled, we can see protoss are not performing well lately. I'm not much into numbers as you know, but the point was, you demanded explanation why someone thought you fell low. I just pointed out why. PS. I agree that Rain choked vs Maru. But it doesn't explain me why protoss are not performing well lately. Rain=/= All protoss, besides he's in slump now. And there have only been 6 tournaments since June... 1 of which was Valencia with the fearsome Stardust, JYP, elfi as the top protosses. Season 2 finals between Bomber and JD had 3 protosses in Ro8. How about the Korean Qualifiers for IEM and WCG which are more stacked than almost all foreign events. IEM - Zest, San, Inno, Curious Top 4 WCG - Sora, Parting, Inno Top 3 Simple math: 6 tournaments = 12 finalists. If we weigh 1st place as 2points. Weigh 1.5 the 2nd place. It will be 21 points in total and protoss managed to take 3 points only. Pretty low... I can play with the numbers too. Pls. stop this nonsense discussion. Lol, you started cherry picking the data first with your 'tournaments wins after June"... Why don't we look at more general data. Perhaps TvP win rate in Korean LAN tournaments/qualifiers? But every time we bring that up, Protoss use the "Well, Terran still WON the tournament". Thats why I call presenting data useless. Everyone gets to cherry pick. Naruto counts finalists. I count only wins. Someone counts top10 in grandmaster. Someone simply checks powerranking. No one knows who's right or who's wrong. Therefore presenting data is not helpful for discussion. I didn't cherrypick when I did collect all Korean data for this month, yet it was called not correct by people, because they didn't like the results. The same people that took the same games from last month, when statistics showed disadvantage for their race.
Several questions to you:
- Why didn't you pick winners, but also included finalists? How do you justify that?
- Knowing that EU and AM is weaker than Korea, why didn't you exclude them?
- Knowing that HOTS just came out 6 months ago, don't you think meta needs to settle down, and we perhaps should look into more recent data?
|
Widow mines should be 1 time explosion unit like baneling, they cost nothing and do so much and theres no weird techpath to get them, for baneling you need to have a beneling nest at least. If not they should at least cost 100 50.
|
I don't understand why to change the DT movement speed, but I like the other possible changes.
|
On September 24 2013 18:16 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2013 18:04 boxerfred wrote:On September 24 2013 17:58 NarutO wrote:On September 24 2013 17:55 LSN wrote:On September 24 2013 17:45 Sissors wrote:On September 24 2013 17:41 LSN wrote:On September 24 2013 17:27 saddaromma wrote:On September 24 2013 17:23 LSN wrote:On September 24 2013 17:08 saddaromma wrote:
Widow mine nerf is so needless. They should've given more options to zerg, maybe burrowing dodges mine shots. No need to make a unit completely useless. I'm not sure this was wellthought changes by blizzard, feels like over-afternoon-one-meeting decisions. Hardly any explanation given to each change. I strongly disagree. TvZ before HOTS worked without widow mines. TvZ is way too mine focused these days. I don't think it works as intended. Mines should be a support unit and not the backbone of whole terran in this matchup. ZvT is just a pure Z vs mine matchup. Mines should be an optional unit not a must have. Fighting every single game vs mass mines in ZvT is zeroing the fun to play for zergs. The mine nerf was overdue considering the fact how big of an impact this unit with the price of 1 roach has had and how much it makes other units obsolete. The mine nerf enables blizzard in the future to do further changes to incentivize a bigger variety of play styles. I like all the changes. Also the protoss changes. If balance does not work out after this there is room for more changes so no reason to worry. Dark templar buff seems odd in the beginning but in the end it makes dt just a more viable in macrogames. It must not longer be a do or die strategy. Sure thing that it will be annoying for both t and z :p If anything I liked zergling vs mine micro, they shoud've preserved it for midgame. And give transition options for the lategame. Now we're back to muta/bane a-move into siegetank/marine  On September 24 2013 17:25 vthree wrote:On September 24 2013 17:19 saddaromma wrote:On September 24 2013 17:11 NarutO wrote:
[quote]
You can explain why, otherwise its pretty meaningless. If 7 second place finishes and 3 tournament wins in premier is winning nothing, I will take it back obviously! I can try to explain. Protoss won 3 out of 18 last premier tournaments, which are WCS EU, WCS AM and Dreamhack, not the biggest tournaments as WCS(final) or WCS KR. Terran won 10 and zerg 5. And yet you continously provide disguised information than balance is totally ok. Not that I say these numbers mean much, afterall maybe bomber,taeja and inno are that good. But fact is, your way of discussing and presenting data leaves not the very best impressions. Why is 1st place the end all for balance? Who has been BY FAR the most dominate player in 2013? Innovation. How many premier tournament 1st place finishes does he have? ONE. Protoss is fine since MC is the #1 money earner for all of SC2... Haha, Iol'd. Imagine DK balances things by player earnings :D The problem is that people are not open minded to changes. Surely mine TvZ is highly beneficial for terran. Just believe me when I tell you that it is killing the fun for most zergs. It is just an unbalanced position that you are in when fighting against mines in its current state. Furthermore the issue about mines is that there is no alternative as they are so good. Therefore ZvT would end up being stale for the rest of SC2 life, without a mine nerf. Example for you: Just consider PvZ if zergs went mass mutalisks any game and you had to defend it with stalkers/sentry/cannon only. Zerg is always offensive, attacking, deciding the pace of the game. If you make one mistake with stalkers then you die to mass muta. You gotta play this every single PvZ. This is how ZvT feels right now. Apart from the fact that it is imbalanced to be in an only defensive position in a matchup it also kills the fun of the game when you play against only a single always the same strategy in every single game of a matchup. Blizzard is doing a step in the right direction there. But I am convinced that the thor needs to be redone completely to make mech a good choice in the end. I agree with you 4M as only option as it currently is, is bad. However you are missing two problems: 1. This isn't just nerfing widow mines a bit, it is nerfing them into the ground. It is freaking enormous. Sure you can say it is just a number. If storm area was decreased by a factor 2.5 would you consider that just a number too? 2. Currently bio-mech and mech are not viable options whatsoever. A 10% decrease in cycle time of siege tanks won't change that, they still won't be viable options. They were in WoL, then they got minor boosts while zerg got huge boosts to directly counter them. Widow mines are way op and too strong for what they cost. If terran appears to be too weak after such a change, further changes need to be done. Widow mines should be a nice addon a zerg does not expect. It should not be the ultimate offense/defense unit that it is now. Just look at PvZ and how versatile the different styles are. I expect TvZ to become this versatile as well so that different strategies require certain adaptions from opponents on both sides and the matchup gets some creativity back. TvZ right now just sucks to play big time. Widowmines and not overpowered and clearly its not too cost efficient. It always gets pointed out, yet whenever we saw the unit lost tab in current good-long TvZs we see its about even, strangely enough right? For reference, Curious vs INnoVation. Widowmines enable terran to trade at least equal, imo with a small advantage for the terran. Once 3/3 tunes in, the terran can trade even better. That, plus given the fact that bio-mine is the most efficient way for terran to play ZvT, I don't think it's a balance issue, but it is a "restricting the game down to one style" issue, which sucks. So I guess I approve the change, but I think the range is nerfed too drastically. @naruto It isn't important if zergs can adapt to this state of the game and still might win games. Important is that this unit that btw is quite cheap for what it does makes the whole ZvT matchup a pure mine defusing game. Also this unit denies other playstyles from terran as it is way stronger than the other styles. Therefore it is safe to say that the mine is op in its current state.
No, being superior to other styles doesn't make the mine overpowered. What is this logic? Biomine is superior, because Marine/Tank and Mech are both too weak in their current state.
|
On September 24 2013 18:16 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2013 18:04 boxerfred wrote:On September 24 2013 17:58 NarutO wrote:On September 24 2013 17:55 LSN wrote:On September 24 2013 17:45 Sissors wrote:On September 24 2013 17:41 LSN wrote:On September 24 2013 17:27 saddaromma wrote:On September 24 2013 17:23 LSN wrote:On September 24 2013 17:08 saddaromma wrote:
Widow mine nerf is so needless. They should've given more options to zerg, maybe burrowing dodges mine shots. No need to make a unit completely useless. I'm not sure this was wellthought changes by blizzard, feels like over-afternoon-one-meeting decisions. Hardly any explanation given to each change. I strongly disagree. TvZ before HOTS worked without widow mines. TvZ is way too mine focused these days. I don't think it works as intended. Mines should be a support unit and not the backbone of whole terran in this matchup. ZvT is just a pure Z vs mine matchup. Mines should be an optional unit not a must have. Fighting every single game vs mass mines in ZvT is zeroing the fun to play for zergs. The mine nerf was overdue considering the fact how big of an impact this unit with the price of 1 roach has had and how much it makes other units obsolete. The mine nerf enables blizzard in the future to do further changes to incentivize a bigger variety of play styles. I like all the changes. Also the protoss changes. If balance does not work out after this there is room for more changes so no reason to worry. Dark templar buff seems odd in the beginning but in the end it makes dt just a more viable in macrogames. It must not longer be a do or die strategy. Sure thing that it will be annoying for both t and z :p If anything I liked zergling vs mine micro, they shoud've preserved it for midgame. And give transition options for the lategame. Now we're back to muta/bane a-move into siegetank/marine On September 24 2013 17:25 vthree wrote:On September 24 2013 17:19 saddaromma wrote:On September 24 2013 17:11 NarutO wrote:
[quote]
You can explain why, otherwise its pretty meaningless. If 7 second place finishes and 3 tournament wins in premier is winning nothing, I will take it back obviously! I can try to explain. Protoss won 3 out of 18 last premier tournaments, which are WCS EU, WCS AM and Dreamhack, not the biggest tournaments as WCS(final) or WCS KR. Terran won 10 and zerg 5. And yet you continously provide disguised information than balance is totally ok. Not that I say these numbers mean much, afterall maybe bomber,taeja and inno are that good. But fact is, your way of discussing and presenting data leaves not the very best impressions. Why is 1st place the end all for balance? Who has been BY FAR the most dominate player in 2013? Innovation. How many premier tournament 1st place finishes does he have? ONE. Protoss is fine since MC is the #1 money earner for all of SC2... Haha, Iol'd. Imagine DK balances things by player earnings :D The problem is that people are not open minded to changes. Surely mine TvZ is highly beneficial for terran. Just believe me when I tell you that it is killing the fun for most zergs. It is just an unbalanced position that you are in when fighting against mines in its current state. Furthermore the issue about mines is that there is no alternative as they are so good. Therefore ZvT would end up being stale for the rest of SC2 life, without a mine nerf. Example for you: Just consider PvZ if zergs went mass mutalisks any game and you had to defend it with stalkers/sentry/cannon only. Zerg is always offensive, attacking, deciding the pace of the game. If you make one mistake with stalkers then you die to mass muta. You gotta play this every single PvZ. This is how ZvT feels right now. Apart from the fact that it is imbalanced to be in an only defensive position in a matchup it also kills the fun of the game when you play against only a single always the same strategy in every single game of a matchup. Blizzard is doing a step in the right direction there. But I am convinced that the thor needs to be redone completely to make mech a good choice in the end. I agree with you 4M as only option as it currently is, is bad. However you are missing two problems: 1. This isn't just nerfing widow mines a bit, it is nerfing them into the ground. It is freaking enormous. Sure you can say it is just a number. If storm area was decreased by a factor 2.5 would you consider that just a number too? 2. Currently bio-mech and mech are not viable options whatsoever. A 10% decrease in cycle time of siege tanks won't change that, they still won't be viable options. They were in WoL, then they got minor boosts while zerg got huge boosts to directly counter them. Widow mines are way op and too strong for what they cost. If terran appears to be too weak after such a change, further changes need to be done. Widow mines should be a nice addon a zerg does not expect. It should not be the ultimate offense/defense unit that it is now. Just look at PvZ and how versatile the different styles are. I expect TvZ to become this versatile as well so that different strategies require certain adaptions from opponents on both sides and the matchup gets some creativity back. TvZ right now just sucks to play big time. Widowmines and not overpowered and clearly its not too cost efficient. It always gets pointed out, yet whenever we saw the unit lost tab in current good-long TvZs we see its about even, strangely enough right? For reference, Curious vs INnoVation. Widowmines enable terran to trade at least equal, imo with a small advantage for the terran. Once 3/3 tunes in, the terran can trade even better. That, plus given the fact that bio-mine is the most efficient way for terran to play ZvT, I don't think it's a balance issue, but it is a "restricting the game down to one style" issue, which sucks. So I guess I approve the change, but I think the range is nerfed too drastically. @naruto It isn't important if zergs can adapt to this state of the game and still might win games. Important is that this unit that btw is quite cheap for what it does makes the whole ZvT matchup a pure mine defusing game. Also this unit denies other playstyles from terran as it is way stronger than the other styles. Therefore it is safe to say that the mine is op in its current state.
It isn't important if terrans can adapt to this state of the game and still might win games. Important is that this unit that btw is quite cheap for what it does makes the whole TvP matchup a pure storm dodging game. Also this unit denies other playstyles from protoss as it is way stronger than the other styles. Therefore it is safe to say that the HT is op in its current state.
|
On September 24 2013 17:53 vthree wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2013 17:46 ETisME wrote:On September 24 2013 17:19 vthree wrote:On September 24 2013 17:03 ETisME wrote:On September 24 2013 16:36 NarutO wrote:On September 24 2013 16:29 tar wrote:
It's awful how ppl are bashing DK no matter what he does. Blizz has changed their patching with HotS considerably. Patches are now rather buffs than nerfes, there is more time for things to establish and even more radical approaches are tested. now, is this appreciated? not really.
There is a test map and already ppl (int his case Terrans mostly) are whining about basically everthing that concerns their race. I don't think the wm nerf breaks TvZ it rather fixes it. How annoying is it to see a 20 to 30 minute TvZ just end because all of a sudden there were just the right wm detonations to kill off everthing Zerg has and then 2/2 or 3/3 marines clean up the rest...great...
Maybe you should actually watch games instead of typing dumb shit. TvZ besides INnoVation is not Terran favored really. The game did switch insanely since Zergs figured out that you can delay the biomine parade at expansions very well with spines, also they have learned to effectively micro against it. In addition to that, INnoVation still seems to go, but he doesn't look nearly as good as in the past. I explained the winrates in proleague TvZ when INnoVation and Flash seemed untouchable and the winrates at 60% or above. They had over 50 games combined not losing TvZ while other Terrans very well did lose TvZ. Now we see INnoVation and Flash falling down or Zergs rising. Also, when you talk about buffs, why is it that Terran got no buff in the match up they really struggle in ? TvP? No word about the photon overcharge, yet more reward for Protoss and still little risk. Maybe you should educate yourself about teh game and the scene as well as about the metagame, before telling Terrans to shut up when they are underperforming below the top level and that severely. The Terrans that really hold up are INnoVation, TaeJa, Polt, Bomber and a few others more or less. I dare to say Protoss and Zerg perform a lot better on average and especially on the lower-top levels. he isn't complaining about balance. he is complaining about the poor game shown due to one lucky mine hit and 3/3 bio roll over later. pretty much everyone is complaining about this. Fix =/= balancing, Fix can mean fixing the poor matchup quality as well. Then can we also get storm to have 1 radius? Because those 'lucky' storms have had 3-3 Protoss rolling over us for a long time now. It is just frustrating that terrans have to be 'perfect' against storms with snipes but zergs just cry when they aren't 'perfect' against WM and lose and Blizzard just nerfs them without providing a real alternative. Many zergs have shown that you can overrun 4M with good control (DRG, Soulkey, Curious, etc) were the storm landed automatically just because you have a HT? If the mines were detonated onto the clumped units because the player punishing the other's mistake, then that would be awesome. mid to late game PvT, terran ball vs toss ball has a lot to do with baiting storms, sniping, emping, feedback etc. the interaction between ghosts and HTs is interesting, medivac ghost drop emp, warp prism ghost storm, HT flanking etc. all have interesting and dynamic interaction. but do you recall any terran in recent matchup that manually use the mines to target fire the clumped banelings? A lot of games were win/loss just because the mine hit/not hit onto the clumped banelings. Zerg can't micro out from a mine hit once they engage and the engagements are too fast for terran to even attempt to manually target fire with mine. not all people aren't saying 4M is way too good and can't be over run, some would, I will leave my opinion to myself. During bio tank thor vs ling baneling muta era, we know T is good because T is target firing the banelings with tanks, bio splitting and protecting tanks, leap frogging tanks, spreading out the tanks just enough etc. We know Z is good because the lings try for a surround, banelings not clumping up and spread to catchup with the bio, muta magic boxing the thor and target firing the tanks or chasing the bio depends on the situation. I will just leave these questions to you: Did the terran lose because he didn't target the mine well? Did he win because he target firing the mines or just too many mines and landed one luckily or zerg mis calcuating the mine numbers or just poor micro from zerg? Personally I want games to be won because the player is manually doing something to punish a mistake, not because the mistake was automatically punished just because he has a unit in position. I dislike a game where the key unit is one that can deal the game winning blow automatically while the other player has to kill it manually Then why is zealot charge automatic? One of the core issues with TvP late game is what you mentioned. The ghost/HT dance is fine, the stalker/viking/colossi target fire is good. But terrans have to stim and kite ON TOP of it. That fact that chargelots are balanced around stutter stepping which is fine in the mid game. But in late game situation, it is just much harder to keep up along with everything else.
Personally I do think T requires a lot more micro than P in TvP, but that doesn't justify T having an easier time on other matchup.
chargelot is one reason why Blizzard added hellbat as a counter (0-0 hellbats still deal with chargelots pretty well), it's just they haven't done anything to deal with the matchup yet. (especially the toss being too safely to get 3rd etc)
having too much micro emphasis on one side is certainly a problem and I have no doubt that blizzard is looking into it.
|
It´s been a while since the last time I´ve posted but I like those changes (I´m a T player) but:
- I like the idea of smaller radius on WM, the role of the tank is being good against groups/armored so the WM should be a unit against lonely powerful units like ultras, so... can we get rid off the lame +shield damage and get a +massive damage instead?
- Tank buff ok but maybe not enough, we should test it first.
- Oracle buff = more all-ins for P?
- Roach Buff = good against P All-ins
We will see how it turns
|
On September 24 2013 18:21 saddaromma wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2013 18:09 NarutO wrote:On September 24 2013 18:07 saddaromma wrote:On September 24 2013 18:00 vthree wrote:On September 24 2013 17:54 saddaromma wrote:On September 24 2013 17:46 vthree wrote:On September 24 2013 17:38 saddaromma wrote:On September 24 2013 17:28 NarutO wrote:On September 24 2013 17:19 saddaromma wrote:On September 24 2013 17:11 NarutO wrote:
[quote]
You can explain why, otherwise its pretty meaningless. If 7 second place finishes and 3 tournament wins in premier is winning nothing, I will take it back obviously! I can try to explain. Protoss won 3 out of 18 last premier tournaments, which are WCS EU, WCS AM and Dreamhack, not the biggest tournaments as WCS(final) or WCS KR. Terran won 10 and zerg 5. And yet you continously provide disguised information than balance is totally ok. Not that I say these numbers mean much, afterall maybe bomber,taeja and inno are that good. But fact is, your way of discussing and presenting data leaves not the very best impressions. Do you believe all Protoss that made it to the finals, lost due to balance reasons? Do you seriously consider Rain vs Maru a balance-issue? Rain was up 2-0 and also had the 3rd game won, he choked and threw it away. After that it went downhill. You argue that WCS EU Finals and Dreamhack are no big tournaments, then I might as well point out that Terran also won a WCS Eu premier and a Dreamhack as well as an IEM - are those not the biggest tournaments as well then? I don't know how you can look at the winner and the winner only - it makes no sense. Protoss is not extinct in finals, actually they are very well represented. From 18 tournaments we had 9 tournaments with a Protoss in the final. 3 times winning, one time it was a PvP final. We had Terrans in the final 12 times, winning 10. We had Zergs in the final 12 times, winning 5. While I believe the won tournaments by Terran clearly exceed the tournament winnings of Protoss and Zerg, I don't believe this is due to balance. If you look at the final games, you can usually explain a loss and in addition it can be a lot "worse" on paper if you simply point out win/loss. As explained at the example of Rain, he could have been up 3-0 and even if he would have lost, it would have been a 3-4. Is a 3-4 in the finals sign of imbalance? I dare to say no. There were only 2 protoss players in final since June, in Asus Rog and IEM (again, not the very best tournaments). Both lost. Taking into account that meta got figured out and dusts are kinda settled, we can see protoss are not performing well lately. I'm not much into numbers as you know, but the point was, you demanded explanation why someone thought you fell low. I just pointed out why. PS. I agree that Rain choked vs Maru. But it doesn't explain me why protoss are not performing well lately. Rain=/= All protoss, besides he's in slump now. And there have only been 6 tournaments since June... 1 of which was Valencia with the fearsome Stardust, JYP, elfi as the top protosses. Season 2 finals between Bomber and JD had 3 protosses in Ro8. How about the Korean Qualifiers for IEM and WCG which are more stacked than almost all foreign events. IEM - Zest, San, Inno, Curious Top 4 WCG - Sora, Parting, Inno Top 3 Simple math: 6 tournaments = 12 finalists. If we weigh 1st place as 2points. Weigh 1.5 the 2nd place. It will be 21 points in total and protoss managed to take 3 points only. Pretty low... I can play with the numbers too. Pls. stop this nonsense discussion. Lol, you started cherry picking the data first with your 'tournaments wins after June"... Why don't we look at more general data. Perhaps TvP win rate in Korean LAN tournaments/qualifiers? But every time we bring that up, Protoss use the "Well, Terran still WON the tournament". Thats why I call presenting data useless. Everyone gets to cherry pick. Naruto counts finalists. I count only wins. Someone counts top10 in grandmaster. Someone simply checks powerranking. No one knows who's right or who's wrong. Therefore presenting data is not helpful for discussion. I didn't cherrypick when I did collect all Korean data for this month, yet it was called not correct by people, because they didn't like the results. The same people that took the same games from last month, when statistics showed disadvantage for their race. Several questions to you: - Why didn't you pick winners, but also included finalists? How do you justify that? - Knowing that EU and AM is weaker than Korea, why didn't you exclude them? - Knowing that HOTS just came out 6 months ago, don't you think meta needs to settle down, and we perhaps should look into more recent data?
Why didn't you pick winners, but also included finalists? How do you justify that?
More data, generally speaking is always superior to less data. As long as you stay within top level and I would argue that if we want a bigger samplesize, tournament finals like TaeJa/San should still be considered just that, we are good. So I included both finalists as it gives us more data and only looking at the winner can be very misleading. Not just would you ignore the opponent, but also the score. Are 5 times 4-3 finals won in TvP sign of imblanace or potential bad luck? I would dare to say it would state a pretty even match.
Knowing that EU and AM is weaker than Korea, why didn't you excluse them?
Last time I excluded something, I was called out as faking statistics. Last time I excluded a tournament because my belief it was not top level, I was called out on cherry picking. Now that I take a look and just a look at the premier results as they are all labeled premier , I get called out for that? I hope that is enough reason for you to understand that this time I didn't manipulate but just took what the premier database got me. In addition I believe the AM / EU finals were not weak and we are only looking at the finals here.
Knowing that HOTS just came out 6 month ago, don't you think meta needs to s ettle down, and we perhaps should look into more recent data?
Didn't you just argue that Protoss is way underperfoming? Ofcourse HOTS is still new, but settling for meta would also mean that you can go a few month without a tournament win of your race. We had two Protoss in the finals but lost, happens. Your suggestion would strongly recommend waiting it out and not chaning the game with a patch as of yet. But as you can see, Blizzard does.
I would also recommend waiting out TvZ, as we can see complete shift of the match up, but thats not what is happening.
|
@naruto
You must be insane if you think the mine in it's current state isn't overpowered vs zerg, if terran is weak after a mine nerf they need to be buffed in other areas, but it's obvious to 99% of people that the mine vs zerg is a complete joke for it's cost and damage. No one likes watching 1 mine hit win a fucking a game, and no one wants to watch it for the next 2 years.
|
On September 24 2013 18:28 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2013 17:53 vthree wrote:On September 24 2013 17:46 ETisME wrote:On September 24 2013 17:19 vthree wrote:On September 24 2013 17:03 ETisME wrote:On September 24 2013 16:36 NarutO wrote:On September 24 2013 16:29 tar wrote:
It's awful how ppl are bashing DK no matter what he does. Blizz has changed their patching with HotS considerably. Patches are now rather buffs than nerfes, there is more time for things to establish and even more radical approaches are tested. now, is this appreciated? not really.
There is a test map and already ppl (int his case Terrans mostly) are whining about basically everthing that concerns their race. I don't think the wm nerf breaks TvZ it rather fixes it. How annoying is it to see a 20 to 30 minute TvZ just end because all of a sudden there were just the right wm detonations to kill off everthing Zerg has and then 2/2 or 3/3 marines clean up the rest...great...
Maybe you should actually watch games instead of typing dumb shit. TvZ besides INnoVation is not Terran favored really. The game did switch insanely since Zergs figured out that you can delay the biomine parade at expansions very well with spines, also they have learned to effectively micro against it. In addition to that, INnoVation still seems to go, but he doesn't look nearly as good as in the past. I explained the winrates in proleague TvZ when INnoVation and Flash seemed untouchable and the winrates at 60% or above. They had over 50 games combined not losing TvZ while other Terrans very well did lose TvZ. Now we see INnoVation and Flash falling down or Zergs rising. Also, when you talk about buffs, why is it that Terran got no buff in the match up they really struggle in ? TvP? No word about the photon overcharge, yet more reward for Protoss and still little risk. Maybe you should educate yourself about teh game and the scene as well as about the metagame, before telling Terrans to shut up when they are underperforming below the top level and that severely. The Terrans that really hold up are INnoVation, TaeJa, Polt, Bomber and a few others more or less. I dare to say Protoss and Zerg perform a lot better on average and especially on the lower-top levels. he isn't complaining about balance. he is complaining about the poor game shown due to one lucky mine hit and 3/3 bio roll over later. pretty much everyone is complaining about this. Fix =/= balancing, Fix can mean fixing the poor matchup quality as well. Then can we also get storm to have 1 radius? Because those 'lucky' storms have had 3-3 Protoss rolling over us for a long time now. It is just frustrating that terrans have to be 'perfect' against storms with snipes but zergs just cry when they aren't 'perfect' against WM and lose and Blizzard just nerfs them without providing a real alternative. Many zergs have shown that you can overrun 4M with good control (DRG, Soulkey, Curious, etc) were the storm landed automatically just because you have a HT? If the mines were detonated onto the clumped units because the player punishing the other's mistake, then that would be awesome. mid to late game PvT, terran ball vs toss ball has a lot to do with baiting storms, sniping, emping, feedback etc. the interaction between ghosts and HTs is interesting, medivac ghost drop emp, warp prism ghost storm, HT flanking etc. all have interesting and dynamic interaction. but do you recall any terran in recent matchup that manually use the mines to target fire the clumped banelings? A lot of games were win/loss just because the mine hit/not hit onto the clumped banelings. Zerg can't micro out from a mine hit once they engage and the engagements are too fast for terran to even attempt to manually target fire with mine. not all people aren't saying 4M is way too good and can't be over run, some would, I will leave my opinion to myself. During bio tank thor vs ling baneling muta era, we know T is good because T is target firing the banelings with tanks, bio splitting and protecting tanks, leap frogging tanks, spreading out the tanks just enough etc. We know Z is good because the lings try for a surround, banelings not clumping up and spread to catchup with the bio, muta magic boxing the thor and target firing the tanks or chasing the bio depends on the situation. I will just leave these questions to you: Did the terran lose because he didn't target the mine well? Did he win because he target firing the mines or just too many mines and landed one luckily or zerg mis calcuating the mine numbers or just poor micro from zerg? Personally I want games to be won because the player is manually doing something to punish a mistake, not because the mistake was automatically punished just because he has a unit in position. I dislike a game where the key unit is one that can deal the game winning blow automatically while the other player has to kill it manually Then why is zealot charge automatic? One of the core issues with TvP late game is what you mentioned. The ghost/HT dance is fine, the stalker/viking/colossi target fire is good. But terrans have to stim and kite ON TOP of it. That fact that chargelots are balanced around stutter stepping which is fine in the mid game. But in late game situation, it is just much harder to keep up along with everything else. Personally I do think T requires a lot more micro than P in TvP, but that doesn't justify T having an easier time on other matchup. chargelot is one reason why Blizzard added hellbat as a counter (0-0 hellbats still deal with chargelots pretty well), it's just they haven't done anything to deal with the matchup yet. (especially the toss being too safely to get 3rd etc) having too much micro emphasis on one side is certainly a problem and I have no doubt that blizzard is looking into it.
But why is Blizzard looking at ZvT first? PvT late game has been an issue since WoL...
|
On September 24 2013 18:16 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2013 18:04 boxerfred wrote:On September 24 2013 17:58 NarutO wrote:On September 24 2013 17:55 LSN wrote:On September 24 2013 17:45 Sissors wrote:On September 24 2013 17:41 LSN wrote:On September 24 2013 17:27 saddaromma wrote:On September 24 2013 17:23 LSN wrote:On September 24 2013 17:08 saddaromma wrote:
Widow mine nerf is so needless. They should've given more options to zerg, maybe burrowing dodges mine shots. No need to make a unit completely useless. I'm not sure this was wellthought changes by blizzard, feels like over-afternoon-one-meeting decisions. Hardly any explanation given to each change. I strongly disagree. TvZ before HOTS worked without widow mines. TvZ is way too mine focused these days. I don't think it works as intended. Mines should be a support unit and not the backbone of whole terran in this matchup. ZvT is just a pure Z vs mine matchup. Mines should be an optional unit not a must have. Fighting every single game vs mass mines in ZvT is zeroing the fun to play for zergs. The mine nerf was overdue considering the fact how big of an impact this unit with the price of 1 roach has had and how much it makes other units obsolete. The mine nerf enables blizzard in the future to do further changes to incentivize a bigger variety of play styles. I like all the changes. Also the protoss changes. If balance does not work out after this there is room for more changes so no reason to worry. Dark templar buff seems odd in the beginning but in the end it makes dt just a more viable in macrogames. It must not longer be a do or die strategy. Sure thing that it will be annoying for both t and z :p If anything I liked zergling vs mine micro, they shoud've preserved it for midgame. And give transition options for the lategame. Now we're back to muta/bane a-move into siegetank/marine On September 24 2013 17:25 vthree wrote:On September 24 2013 17:19 saddaromma wrote:On September 24 2013 17:11 NarutO wrote:
[quote]
You can explain why, otherwise its pretty meaningless. If 7 second place finishes and 3 tournament wins in premier is winning nothing, I will take it back obviously! I can try to explain. Protoss won 3 out of 18 last premier tournaments, which are WCS EU, WCS AM and Dreamhack, not the biggest tournaments as WCS(final) or WCS KR. Terran won 10 and zerg 5. And yet you continously provide disguised information than balance is totally ok. Not that I say these numbers mean much, afterall maybe bomber,taeja and inno are that good. But fact is, your way of discussing and presenting data leaves not the very best impressions. Why is 1st place the end all for balance? Who has been BY FAR the most dominate player in 2013? Innovation. How many premier tournament 1st place finishes does he have? ONE. Protoss is fine since MC is the #1 money earner for all of SC2... Haha, Iol'd. Imagine DK balances things by player earnings :D The problem is that people are not open minded to changes. Surely mine TvZ is highly beneficial for terran. Just believe me when I tell you that it is killing the fun for most zergs. It is just an unbalanced position that you are in when fighting against mines in its current state. Furthermore the issue about mines is that there is no alternative as they are so good. Therefore ZvT would end up being stale for the rest of SC2 life, without a mine nerf. Example for you: Just consider PvZ if zergs went mass mutalisks any game and you had to defend it with stalkers/sentry/cannon only. Zerg is always offensive, attacking, deciding the pace of the game. If you make one mistake with stalkers then you die to mass muta. You gotta play this every single PvZ. This is how ZvT feels right now. Apart from the fact that it is imbalanced to be in an only defensive position in a matchup it also kills the fun of the game when you play against only a single always the same strategy in every single game of a matchup. Blizzard is doing a step in the right direction there. But I am convinced that the thor needs to be redone completely to make mech a good choice in the end. I agree with you 4M as only option as it currently is, is bad. However you are missing two problems: 1. This isn't just nerfing widow mines a bit, it is nerfing them into the ground. It is freaking enormous. Sure you can say it is just a number. If storm area was decreased by a factor 2.5 would you consider that just a number too? 2. Currently bio-mech and mech are not viable options whatsoever. A 10% decrease in cycle time of siege tanks won't change that, they still won't be viable options. They were in WoL, then they got minor boosts while zerg got huge boosts to directly counter them. Widow mines are way op and too strong for what they cost. If terran appears to be too weak after such a change, further changes need to be done. Widow mines should be a nice addon a zerg does not expect. It should not be the ultimate offense/defense unit that it is now. Just look at PvZ and how versatile the different styles are. I expect TvZ to become this versatile as well so that different strategies require certain adaptions from opponents on both sides and the matchup gets some creativity back. TvZ right now just sucks to play big time. Widowmines and not overpowered and clearly its not too cost efficient. It always gets pointed out, yet whenever we saw the unit lost tab in current good-long TvZs we see its about even, strangely enough right? For reference, Curious vs INnoVation. Widowmines enable terran to trade at least equal, imo with a small advantage for the terran. Once 3/3 tunes in, the terran can trade even better. That, plus given the fact that bio-mine is the most efficient way for terran to play ZvT, I don't think it's a balance issue, but it is a "restricting the game down to one style" issue, which sucks. So I guess I approve the change, but I think the range is nerfed too drastically. @naruto It isn't important if zergs can adapt to this state of the game and still might win games. Important is that this unit that btw is quite cheap for what it does makes the whole ZvT matchup a pure mine defusing game. Also this unit denies other playstyles from terran as it is way stronger than the other styles. Therefore it is safe to say that the mine is op in its current state.
Even if that was the case, which I don't agree with, currently 4M in TvZ is the only viable way to play, everything else is pretty gimmicky. If you are going to gut the core unit of the only viable way to play, you have to fix other units, in this case the tank. Terran requires some AoE to kill mass banes, in WoL that came in the form of tanks. With the new muta(and later vipers) the tank simply doesn't work, they can be disabled and sniped way to easily and an increased attack speed doesn't change that. If this change goes through, then I forsee basically the same playstyle but instead of mines it will be hellbats. It's a lot worse, but it's still better than pure bio and I'd venture a guess better than nerfed 4M.
|
On September 24 2013 18:31 MattD wrote:
@naruto
You must be insane if you think the mine in it's current state isn't overpowered vs zerg, if terran is weak after a mine nerf they need to be buffed in other areas, but it's obvious to 99% of people that the mine vs zerg is a complete joke for it's cost and damage. No one likes watching 1 mine hit win a fucking a game, and no one wants to watch it for the next 2 years.
The match up got way harder for Zerg and I believe randomness isn't a good thing, but to be honest while lucky minehits can happen, they don't happen too frequently and we saw in the current TvZ that you can very well avoid "lucky" minehits with skill. As in you spread your units / attack better.
I believe ZvT right now is going a very good way for Zerg.
|
On September 24 2013 18:26 vthree wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2013 18:16 LSN wrote:On September 24 2013 18:04 boxerfred wrote:On September 24 2013 17:58 NarutO wrote:On September 24 2013 17:55 LSN wrote:On September 24 2013 17:45 Sissors wrote:On September 24 2013 17:41 LSN wrote:On September 24 2013 17:27 saddaromma wrote:On September 24 2013 17:23 LSN wrote:On September 24 2013 17:08 saddaromma wrote:
Widow mine nerf is so needless. They should've given more options to zerg, maybe burrowing dodges mine shots. No need to make a unit completely useless. I'm not sure this was wellthought changes by blizzard, feels like over-afternoon-one-meeting decisions. Hardly any explanation given to each change. I strongly disagree. TvZ before HOTS worked without widow mines. TvZ is way too mine focused these days. I don't think it works as intended. Mines should be a support unit and not the backbone of whole terran in this matchup. ZvT is just a pure Z vs mine matchup. Mines should be an optional unit not a must have. Fighting every single game vs mass mines in ZvT is zeroing the fun to play for zergs. The mine nerf was overdue considering the fact how big of an impact this unit with the price of 1 roach has had and how much it makes other units obsolete. The mine nerf enables blizzard in the future to do further changes to incentivize a bigger variety of play styles. I like all the changes. Also the protoss changes. If balance does not work out after this there is room for more changes so no reason to worry. Dark templar buff seems odd in the beginning but in the end it makes dt just a more viable in macrogames. It must not longer be a do or die strategy. Sure thing that it will be annoying for both t and z :p If anything I liked zergling vs mine micro, they shoud've preserved it for midgame. And give transition options for the lategame. Now we're back to muta/bane a-move into siegetank/marine On September 24 2013 17:25 vthree wrote:On September 24 2013 17:19 saddaromma wrote:
[quote]
I can try to explain. Protoss won 3 out of 18 last premier tournaments, which are WCS EU, WCS AM and Dreamhack, not the biggest tournaments as WCS(final) or WCS KR. Terran won 10 and zerg 5. And yet you continously provide disguised information than balance is totally ok. Not that I say these numbers mean much, afterall maybe bomber,taeja and inno are that good. But fact is, your way of discussing and presenting data leaves not the very best impressions. Why is 1st place the end all for balance? Who has been BY FAR the most dominate player in 2013? Innovation. How many premier tournament 1st place finishes does he have? ONE. Protoss is fine since MC is the #1 money earner for all of SC2... Haha, Iol'd. Imagine DK balances things by player earnings :D The problem is that people are not open minded to changes. Surely mine TvZ is highly beneficial for terran. Just believe me when I tell you that it is killing the fun for most zergs. It is just an unbalanced position that you are in when fighting against mines in its current state. Furthermore the issue about mines is that there is no alternative as they are so good. Therefore ZvT would end up being stale for the rest of SC2 life, without a mine nerf. Example for you: Just consider PvZ if zergs went mass mutalisks any game and you had to defend it with stalkers/sentry/cannon only. Zerg is always offensive, attacking, deciding the pace of the game. If you make one mistake with stalkers then you die to mass muta. You gotta play this every single PvZ. This is how ZvT feels right now. Apart from the fact that it is imbalanced to be in an only defensive position in a matchup it also kills the fun of the game when you play against only a single always the same strategy in every single game of a matchup. Blizzard is doing a step in the right direction there. But I am convinced that the thor needs to be redone completely to make mech a good choice in the end. I agree with you 4M as only option as it currently is, is bad. However you are missing two problems: 1. This isn't just nerfing widow mines a bit, it is nerfing them into the ground. It is freaking enormous. Sure you can say it is just a number. If storm area was decreased by a factor 2.5 would you consider that just a number too? 2. Currently bio-mech and mech are not viable options whatsoever. A 10% decrease in cycle time of siege tanks won't change that, they still won't be viable options. They were in WoL, then they got minor boosts while zerg got huge boosts to directly counter them. Widow mines are way op and too strong for what they cost. If terran appears to be too weak after such a change, further changes need to be done. Widow mines should be a nice addon a zerg does not expect. It should not be the ultimate offense/defense unit that it is now. Just look at PvZ and how versatile the different styles are. I expect TvZ to become this versatile as well so that different strategies require certain adaptions from opponents on both sides and the matchup gets some creativity back. TvZ right now just sucks to play big time. Widowmines and not overpowered and clearly its not too cost efficient. It always gets pointed out, yet whenever we saw the unit lost tab in current good-long TvZs we see its about even, strangely enough right? For reference, Curious vs INnoVation. Widowmines enable terran to trade at least equal, imo with a small advantage for the terran. Once 3/3 tunes in, the terran can trade even better. That, plus given the fact that bio-mine is the most efficient way for terran to play ZvT, I don't think it's a balance issue, but it is a "restricting the game down to one style" issue, which sucks. So I guess I approve the change, but I think the range is nerfed too drastically. @naruto It isn't important if zergs can adapt to this state of the game and still might win games. Important is that this unit that btw is quite cheap for what it does makes the whole ZvT matchup a pure mine defusing game. Also this unit denies other playstyles from terran as it is way stronger than the other styles. Therefore it is safe to say that the mine is op in its current state. It isn't important if terrans can adapt to this state of the game and still might win games. Important is that this unit that btw is quite cheap for what it does makes the whole TvP matchup a pure storm dodging game. Also this unit denies other playstyles from protoss as it is way stronger than the other styles. Therefore it is safe to say that the HT is op in its current state.
HTs are no comparison to widow mines. They're harder/risky to get and not cheap either.
If anything you should compare widow mines to banelings. Almost same cost and accessibility. That said, banelings are easy to use, widow mines require careful planning. Both are hard to play against. But widow mines have higher skill-cap with a potential of doing major damage to both ground and air. Banelings are less versatile.
All in all this has nothing to do with balance. But I get where the complaints are coming from, window mines seem to be "unfair" for spectator. Similar to lurkers in BW. Pro-gamers compensated it with good micro. Therefore I also think widow mines should remain untouched. For the sake of better micro and higher skillcap.
|
On September 24 2013 18:21 Fuchsteufelswild wrote:
Dark Templar movement speed increased from 2.813 to 3.375
Actually I like this personally. I don't play terran, but personally, I know how to build turrets and have an actual army. *Shrug* Some people rely on scans with greedy play too much and this helps that to be punished. I think it should be good for gameplay.
Sorry, but the problem in holding off a DT drop is not that I, as the Terran, play too greedy.
If 3-4 DTs are dropped into my main and can raise all turrets that I built in preparation, before enough units can run from my natural defense line into the main, and I have to burn like 2 to 3 scans for each in addition to hunt them all down because they keep running out of scan range, that just has nothing to do with being greedy anymore.
|
On September 24 2013 18:31 MattD wrote:
@naruto
You must be insane if you think the mine in it's current state isn't overpowered vs zerg, if terran is weak after a mine nerf they need to be buffed in other areas, but it's obvious to 99% of people that the mine vs zerg is a complete joke for it's cost and damage. No one likes watching 1 mine hit win a fucking a game, and no one wants to watch it for the next 2 years.
exactly this.
And its not only about watching. People leave the game cause they in fact don't like to play this style of game. It is not important if some pro korean machine zerg manages to deal with it rather well or not. Its impact on the TvZ metagame is just too huge and it denies other playstyles of terran as well as it limits the zvt metagame generally way too much.
|
On September 24 2013 18:33 vthree wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2013 18:28 ETisME wrote:On September 24 2013 17:53 vthree wrote:On September 24 2013 17:46 ETisME wrote:On September 24 2013 17:19 vthree wrote:On September 24 2013 17:03 ETisME wrote:On September 24 2013 16:36 NarutO wrote:On September 24 2013 16:29 tar wrote:
It's awful how ppl are bashing DK no matter what he does. Blizz has changed their patching with HotS considerably. Patches are now rather buffs than nerfes, there is more time for things to establish and even more radical approaches are tested. now, is this appreciated? not really.
There is a test map and already ppl (int his case Terrans mostly) are whining about basically everthing that concerns their race. I don't think the wm nerf breaks TvZ it rather fixes it. How annoying is it to see a 20 to 30 minute TvZ just end because all of a sudden there were just the right wm detonations to kill off everthing Zerg has and then 2/2 or 3/3 marines clean up the rest...great...
Maybe you should actually watch games instead of typing dumb shit. TvZ besides INnoVation is not Terran favored really. The game did switch insanely since Zergs figured out that you can delay the biomine parade at expansions very well with spines, also they have learned to effectively micro against it. In addition to that, INnoVation still seems to go, but he doesn't look nearly as good as in the past. I explained the winrates in proleague TvZ when INnoVation and Flash seemed untouchable and the winrates at 60% or above. They had over 50 games combined not losing TvZ while other Terrans very well did lose TvZ. Now we see INnoVation and Flash falling down or Zergs rising. Also, when you talk about buffs, why is it that Terran got no buff in the match up they really struggle in ? TvP? No word about the photon overcharge, yet more reward for Protoss and still little risk. Maybe you should educate yourself about teh game and the scene as well as about the metagame, before telling Terrans to shut up when they are underperforming below the top level and that severely. The Terrans that really hold up are INnoVation, TaeJa, Polt, Bomber and a few others more or less. I dare to say Protoss and Zerg perform a lot better on average and especially on the lower-top levels. he isn't complaining about balance. he is complaining about the poor game shown due to one lucky mine hit and 3/3 bio roll over later. pretty much everyone is complaining about this. Fix =/= balancing, Fix can mean fixing the poor matchup quality as well. Then can we also get storm to have 1 radius? Because those 'lucky' storms have had 3-3 Protoss rolling over us for a long time now. It is just frustrating that terrans have to be 'perfect' against storms with snipes but zergs just cry when they aren't 'perfect' against WM and lose and Blizzard just nerfs them without providing a real alternative. Many zergs have shown that you can overrun 4M with good control (DRG, Soulkey, Curious, etc) were the storm landed automatically just because you have a HT? If the mines were detonated onto the clumped units because the player punishing the other's mistake, then that would be awesome. mid to late game PvT, terran ball vs toss ball has a lot to do with baiting storms, sniping, emping, feedback etc. the interaction between ghosts and HTs is interesting, medivac ghost drop emp, warp prism ghost storm, HT flanking etc. all have interesting and dynamic interaction. but do you recall any terran in recent matchup that manually use the mines to target fire the clumped banelings? A lot of games were win/loss just because the mine hit/not hit onto the clumped banelings. Zerg can't micro out from a mine hit once they engage and the engagements are too fast for terran to even attempt to manually target fire with mine. not all people aren't saying 4M is way too good and can't be over run, some would, I will leave my opinion to myself. During bio tank thor vs ling baneling muta era, we know T is good because T is target firing the banelings with tanks, bio splitting and protecting tanks, leap frogging tanks, spreading out the tanks just enough etc. We know Z is good because the lings try for a surround, banelings not clumping up and spread to catchup with the bio, muta magic boxing the thor and target firing the tanks or chasing the bio depends on the situation. I will just leave these questions to you: Did the terran lose because he didn't target the mine well? Did he win because he target firing the mines or just too many mines and landed one luckily or zerg mis calcuating the mine numbers or just poor micro from zerg? Personally I want games to be won because the player is manually doing something to punish a mistake, not because the mistake was automatically punished just because he has a unit in position. I dislike a game where the key unit is one that can deal the game winning blow automatically while the other player has to kill it manually Then why is zealot charge automatic? One of the core issues with TvP late game is what you mentioned. The ghost/HT dance is fine, the stalker/viking/colossi target fire is good. But terrans have to stim and kite ON TOP of it. That fact that chargelots are balanced around stutter stepping which is fine in the mid game. But in late game situation, it is just much harder to keep up along with everything else. Personally I do think T requires a lot more micro than P in TvP, but that doesn't justify T having an easier time on other matchup. chargelot is one reason why Blizzard added hellbat as a counter (0-0 hellbats still deal with chargelots pretty well), it's just they haven't done anything to deal with the matchup yet. (especially the toss being too safely to get 3rd etc) having too much micro emphasis on one side is certainly a problem and I have no doubt that blizzard is looking into it. But why is Blizzard looking at ZvT first? PvT late game has been an issue since WoL...
you are asking me :S
Maybe the community is whining harder for ZvT (maybe it is because TvZ is supposed to be the flagship matchup for starcraft and most people are disappointed by it?)
maybe blizzard wants to see how mech in tvp works
maybe blizzard is waiting for T to adapt hellbats in TvP (if it is possible)
No one except blizzard knows but the one thing we know is that Blizzard is being slow at patching things in hots and their chain of thought is not necessarily on the line with the community.
Maybe hellbats already is enough to deal with the mass chargelot remax, it's just toss is having the third way too easily and just overwhelm Terran without even needing to go that mass chargelot heavy composition in later stage.
|
On September 24 2013 18:36 saddaromma wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2013 18:26 vthree wrote:On September 24 2013 18:16 LSN wrote:On September 24 2013 18:04 boxerfred wrote:On September 24 2013 17:58 NarutO wrote:On September 24 2013 17:55 LSN wrote:On September 24 2013 17:45 Sissors wrote:On September 24 2013 17:41 LSN wrote:On September 24 2013 17:27 saddaromma wrote:On September 24 2013 17:23 LSN wrote:
[quote]
I strongly disagree. TvZ before HOTS worked without widow mines. TvZ is way too mine focused these days. I don't think it works as intended. Mines should be a support unit and not the backbone of whole terran in this matchup. ZvT is just a pure Z vs mine matchup. Mines should be an optional unit not a must have. Fighting every single game vs mass mines in ZvT is zeroing the fun to play for zergs. The mine nerf was overdue considering the fact how big of an impact this unit with the price of 1 roach has had and how much it makes other units obsolete. The mine nerf enables blizzard in the future to do further changes to incentivize a bigger variety of play styles.
I like all the changes. Also the protoss changes. If balance does not work out after this there is room for more changes so no reason to worry.
Dark templar buff seems odd in the beginning but in the end it makes dt just a more viable in macrogames. It must not longer be a do or die strategy. Sure thing that it will be annoying for both t and z :p If anything I liked zergling vs mine micro, they shoud've preserved it for midgame. And give transition options for the lategame. Now we're back to muta/bane a-move into siegetank/marine On September 24 2013 17:25 vthree wrote:
[quote]
Why is 1st place the end all for balance? Who has been BY FAR the most dominate player in 2013? Innovation. How many premier tournament 1st place finishes does he have? ONE.
Protoss is fine since MC is the #1 money earner for all of SC2...
Haha, Iol'd. Imagine DK balances things by player earnings :D The problem is that people are not open minded to changes. Surely mine TvZ is highly beneficial for terran. Just believe me when I tell you that it is killing the fun for most zergs. It is just an unbalanced position that you are in when fighting against mines in its current state. Furthermore the issue about mines is that there is no alternative as they are so good. Therefore ZvT would end up being stale for the rest of SC2 life, without a mine nerf. Example for you: Just consider PvZ if zergs went mass mutalisks any game and you had to defend it with stalkers/sentry/cannon only. Zerg is always offensive, attacking, deciding the pace of the game. If you make one mistake with stalkers then you die to mass muta. You gotta play this every single PvZ. This is how ZvT feels right now. Apart from the fact that it is imbalanced to be in an only defensive position in a matchup it also kills the fun of the game when you play against only a single always the same strategy in every single game of a matchup. Blizzard is doing a step in the right direction there. But I am convinced that the thor needs to be redone completely to make mech a good choice in the end. I agree with you 4M as only option as it currently is, is bad. However you are missing two problems: 1. This isn't just nerfing widow mines a bit, it is nerfing them into the ground. It is freaking enormous. Sure you can say it is just a number. If storm area was decreased by a factor 2.5 would you consider that just a number too? 2. Currently bio-mech and mech are not viable options whatsoever. A 10% decrease in cycle time of siege tanks won't change that, they still won't be viable options. They were in WoL, then they got minor boosts while zerg got huge boosts to directly counter them. Widow mines are way op and too strong for what they cost. If terran appears to be too weak after such a change, further changes need to be done. Widow mines should be a nice addon a zerg does not expect. It should not be the ultimate offense/defense unit that it is now. Just look at PvZ and how versatile the different styles are. I expect TvZ to become this versatile as well so that different strategies require certain adaptions from opponents on both sides and the matchup gets some creativity back. TvZ right now just sucks to play big time. Widowmines and not overpowered and clearly its not too cost efficient. It always gets pointed out, yet whenever we saw the unit lost tab in current good-long TvZs we see its about even, strangely enough right? For reference, Curious vs INnoVation. Widowmines enable terran to trade at least equal, imo with a small advantage for the terran. Once 3/3 tunes in, the terran can trade even better. That, plus given the fact that bio-mine is the most efficient way for terran to play ZvT, I don't think it's a balance issue, but it is a "restricting the game down to one style" issue, which sucks. So I guess I approve the change, but I think the range is nerfed too drastically. @naruto It isn't important if zergs can adapt to this state of the game and still might win games. Important is that this unit that btw is quite cheap for what it does makes the whole ZvT matchup a pure mine defusing game. Also this unit denies other playstyles from terran as it is way stronger than the other styles. Therefore it is safe to say that the mine is op in its current state. It isn't important if terrans can adapt to this state of the game and still might win games. Important is that this unit that btw is quite cheap for what it does makes the whole TvP matchup a pure storm dodging game. Also this unit denies other playstyles from protoss as it is way stronger than the other styles. Therefore it is safe to say that the HT is op in its current state. HTs are no comparison to widow mines. They're harder/risky to get and not cheap either. If anything you should compare widow mines to banelings. Almost same cost and accessibility. That said, banelings are easy to use, widow mines require careful planning. Both are hard to play against. But widow mines have higher skill-cap with a potential of doing major damage to both ground and air. Banelings are less versatile. All in all this has nothing to do with balance. But I get where the complaints are coming from, window mines seem to be "unfair" for spectator. Similar to lurkers in BW. Pro-gamers compensated it with good micro. Therefore I also think widow mines should remain untouched. For the sake of better micro and higher skillcap.
For the damage that they can do to a terran army? They are definitely cheap. I don't think any other unit at that cost has the same game turning potential.
And that is the problem with MSC, It used to be risky teching to storms quickly, but not anymore.
|
I do wonder how people can applaud Blizzard for buffing units instead of nerfing them, as this super awesome balance philosophy, while completely overlooking that this patch, which has a barely noticeable buff to siege tanks, also completely breaks the widow mine. It's just so dumb, it hurts my brain every time someone says "buff, not nerf".
|
On September 24 2013 18:44 Grumbels wrote:
I do wonder how people can applaud Blizzard for buffing units instead of nerfing them, as this super awesome balance philosophy, while completely overlooking that this patch, which has a barely noticeable buff to siege tanks, also completely breaks the widow mine. It's just so dumb, it hurts my brain every time someone says "buff, not nerf".
Buffs to units increase their potential that good players can use, nerfs destroy potential. Buffing is the right approach in my opinion. Obviously you are free to have another one, but I believe it increases skill ceiling if there is more potential to do stuff that good players will always find a way to shine
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
