|
United States7483 Posts
On February 08 2014 05:30 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2014 05:29 Whitewing wrote:On February 08 2014 05:25 Ghanburighan wrote:On February 08 2014 04:58 Whitewing wrote:On February 08 2014 04:55 Ghanburighan wrote:Whitewing, do you really want to utter such nonsense: The oracle has basically disappeared from pro PvTs, why does it need a nerf? It was used in Trap v Supernova this morning... And it has been probably the macro opening for P since the buff. Sure, blink stalker is incredibly popular at the moment, but oracle still features in the majority of non-blink games. It is not in the majority of pro games, and it only used in games like Trap vs. Supernova because it DOESN'T show up in every game. When it was popular there were games all the time where the oracle was defended and the protoss wound up behind. SoS was basically the only player on the planet who could make oracle openers work into a normal macro game without doing crippling levels of damage, and he was just plain playing better than his opponents. I should point out that was someone says "it has basically disappeared" which means it is rare, rather than 100% non-existent, saying that "it happened once this morning!" is not evidence that they are wrong. Blink stalker all-ins also just got a nerf, and I'm absolutely on board for a mothership core vision range nerf to nerf the blink stalker all-in more. The goal when balancing a game is to make the smallest, most incremental changes possible to see if you hit your target. The goal when designing a game is to make big changes and see what happens: they aren't currently designing though, they are balancing. Fine, let's look at the previous big korean PvT match, Parting v TY. Did we have an oracle opening there? Yes we did... I could keep this going for a while, but, honestly, you live in your own world where facts don't seem to apply and the onus to prove things is on everyone but you. No, you're just under the impression that PvT is horrifically imbalanced and that everything protoss does needs a nerf, wheras I think it's only slightly imbalanced and only a few minor changes are needed to even things out. I also will admit to not watching GSL this season, I don't have a subscription and the times are bad for me, but I have seen proleague. We were not even discussing balance -_- What would my biases have to do with whether oracles are a common opening or not. It's your incredibly arrogance at asserting claims which you have no idea about that I took offense with.
I've read enough of your posts in this thread to know where you stand. Look: oracle openings do not show up every game like you seem to insinuate. David Kim noticed it too, are you accusing him of being a liar? Not every PvT is blink attack or oracle opener.
You also don't seem to know what arrogance is. Arrogance is not making a statement of fact and then being wrong about it.
|
If you nerf blink stalker openings and oracle opens to much, you just end up with turtle toss, which no one wants. If Terran needs more options, make that possible through scouting or other routes. Nerfing effective builds is not the way to go. Buffing underused strats is better.
|
On February 08 2014 03:07 Ghanburighan wrote:
Whitewing and Plansix, the two people I'd like to have balancing the game... I would love getting every fact and complaint responded to with patronising and trolling.
Edit: And IdrA, when still a top foreigner, predicted a number of imbalances, including ghosts getting nerfed almost a year before they were, alongside obvious ones like infestors getting nerfed. So, yes, being good at the game does give you good knowledge of the game. Actually arguing his point with facts and examples makes it much better, of course.
In early WOL while zergs were hugely underpresented and Dustin Browder stated that TvZ win/rates were close to 50-50, it was clear for everyone who ignored the useless win/rate statistics (that always goes towards 50/50 regardless of balance) and either looked at more relevant numbers or simply analyzed games, that it was heavily T favored. Blizzad, however, back then acted a bit quicker than they do today and nerfed Reapers and Siege tanks shortly after the patch. Idra, however, kept saying that it still was T favored and argued that it was more imbalanced (prepatch) than most people realized.
He was !@#$%^&* right, According to statistics by Aliguac, there was a terran invovled in all non-mirror matchups 70-77% of all games in early WOL compared to 50-55% for zerg --> That indicates that the matchup was heavily T favored.
How does that look today? Protoss = 72% and terran = 56% --> T very underpowered.
While some of the suggestions Dwf presents might not be neccasary (tactical Nuke), I really think its extremely unlikely that the combo of these suggestions will make the game T favored. I would even argue that the combo of these suggestions are much less drastic than the fungal growth buff that Blizzards gave Zerg in spring 2011. And back then FYI terran representation was around 68%, zerg representation around 65%. Aliguac W/R were slightly T favored (similar to how PvT w/r today are slightly toss favored).
So overall, Z wasn't underperforming as badly as T is today, and even later on (after Z representation equalized T representation), Zerg got another buff --> Queen range increased from 3 to 5, which arguably also was a more significant than the combo of Dwf's suggestions.
So IMO, either a big change is needed (like a big Hellion buff to buff mech) or it could be a combo of small suggestions, such as what Dwf presents.
|
Northern Ireland25081 Posts
Proxy oracle builds that transition into a standard macro game without significantly putting the Protoss behind should not be viable, in this Wombat's opinion.
The Oracle buff was also silly, DK is right when he says pros are dealing with it better, but they are oft doing so by playing to near blind-counter it in some games. The early engi and slightly delayed tech makes dealing with blink allins even harder. If Protoss intended to play a macro-oriented game and not to pursue these kind of aggressive options a Terran playing defensively and not cutting corners can fall behind.
I'm in favour of many of the Dwf's changes, especially certain reversions of Terran nerfs that are now anachronistic. Stim research time was dropped way way back in WoL in an era of smaller maps and Protoss requiring sentries to hold ramps, not quite as true now
I also feel Protoss upgrades need cost increase again. Protoss need fewer sentries, so they have more gas in PvT than they would in WoL by virtue of that cut. They get the fastest ups and they're shared by all ground units, it also might lead to some more stylistic divergence
|
On February 08 2014 05:39 Plansix wrote:
If you nerf blink stalker openings and oracle opens to much, you just end up with turtle toss, which no one wants. If Terran needs more options, make that possible through scouting or other routes. Nerfing effective builds is not the way to go. Buffing underused strats is better.
You also don't want a game with too many amazing early game/all-in possibilities. Blink is too strong right now, it needs to be looked at.
|
On February 08 2014 06:01 ffadicted wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2014 05:39 Plansix wrote:
If you nerf blink stalker openings and oracle opens to much, you just end up with turtle toss, which no one wants. If Terran needs more options, make that possible through scouting or other routes. Nerfing effective builds is not the way to go. Buffing underused strats is better. You also don't want a game with too many amazing early game/all-in possibilities. Blink is too strong right now, it needs to be looked at.
And if terrans have better scouting options, they can see it comming, which will help them deal with it. You don't need to nerf something directly to reduce how powerful it is in the game.
|
On February 08 2014 05:29 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2014 05:25 Ghanburighan wrote:On February 08 2014 04:58 Whitewing wrote:On February 08 2014 04:55 Ghanburighan wrote:Whitewing, do you really want to utter such nonsense: The oracle has basically disappeared from pro PvTs, why does it need a nerf? It was used in Trap v Supernova this morning... And it has been probably the macro opening for P since the buff. Sure, blink stalker is incredibly popular at the moment, but oracle still features in the majority of non-blink games. It is not in the majority of pro games, and it only used in games like Trap vs. Supernova because it DOESN'T show up in every game. When it was popular there were games all the time where the oracle was defended and the protoss wound up behind. SoS was basically the only player on the planet who could make oracle openers work into a normal macro game without doing crippling levels of damage, and he was just plain playing better than his opponents. I should point out that was someone says "it has basically disappeared" which means it is rare, rather than 100% non-existent, saying that "it happened once this morning!" is not evidence that they are wrong. Blink stalker all-ins also just got a nerf, and I'm absolutely on board for a mothership core vision range nerf to nerf the blink stalker all-in more. The goal when balancing a game is to make the smallest, most incremental changes possible to see if you hit your target. The goal when designing a game is to make big changes and see what happens: they aren't currently designing though, they are balancing. Fine, let's look at the previous big korean PvT match, Parting v TY. Did we have an oracle opening there? Yes we did... I could keep this going for a while, but, honestly, you live in your own world where facts don't seem to apply and the onus to prove things is on everyone but you. No, you're just under the impression that PvT is horrifically imbalanced and that everything protoss does needs a nerf, wheras I think it's only slightly imbalanced and only a few minor changes are needed to even things out. I also will admit to not watching GSL this season, I don't have a subscription and the times are bad for me, but I have seen proleague. Are you suggesting that oracle openers should not be viable? Answer this then: How much damage does a 1 base oracle opener have to do to break even, given the investment into stargate, the unit, and where the toss would be without (faster nexus, faster robo, faster forges, etc.).
Well if you had looked at Code A you would had noticed that not a single Terran who played vs a Protoss made it into Code S. That Protoss went like 17/1 or something ridicoulous like that in maps and had 94% win ratio in maps and like 76% in series.
If you had looked at the last three major tournaments, we have seen 3 PvP finals. If you had payed attention to Code S you would had noticed there are 3 Terrans in round 32, and one of them got massacred today (so be it he played quite bad). Also you had noticed 4/4 players making it into round of 16 is Protoss.
If you also had payed attention to the IEM qualifier in Korea last night you might had noticed that a single Terran took a map vs a Protoss from round 16 and that was TY going for a inbase proxy baracks bunker rush that went unscouted vs Parting.
I can go on for ages - but if this is just a "small imbalance" - can you please explain to me what makes a.. Lets say standard sized imbalance?
Terran clearly now needs more than a Ghost buff.
At the moment Protoss has so many viable options that it does not matter if you nerf one of them slightly since there will be so many options left that still is superior to any Terran build.
Meanwhile Terran needs to go for the same boring build over and over again. Its not just about balance, its about actually being able to enjoy the game.
And that last part is what I really hope for Blizzard to change since I am so tired of playing TvP that I probably made my last ladder game yesterday until something changes. And I have made around 8K matches in Master League so it's probably only good for me to have some time off this game.
|
On February 08 2014 05:39 Plansix wrote:
If you nerf blink stalker openings and oracle opens to much, you just end up with turtle toss, which no one wants. If Terran needs more options, make that possible through scouting or other routes. Nerfing effective builds is not the way to go. Buffing underused strats is better.
Blink stalker and oracle are the reason why terran has so few options. All openings terran does have to take into account blink and oracle. You simply can not come up with opening that doesn´t consider blink or oracle since they are so standard play nowadays.
WoL was pretty much turtle toss every game, yet we saw some of the most amazing games. For example Mvp vs. Squirtle finals and MKP vs. Parting games. TvP is real lackluster since it is no longer the back and forth game it used to be. A lot of aggression is shut down by MSC and a lot of games are decided by very few things. For example Trap vs. Maru ended was decided by 1-base DTs.
|
On February 08 2014 06:01 ffadicted wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2014 05:39 Plansix wrote:
If you nerf blink stalker openings and oracle opens to much, you just end up with turtle toss, which no one wants. If Terran needs more options, make that possible through scouting or other routes. Nerfing effective builds is not the way to go. Buffing underused strats is better. You also don't want a game with too many amazing early game/all-in possibilities. Blink is too strong right now, it needs to be looked at.
No, thanks. Blink research was already nerfed by about 70 seconds (iirc) in HOTS. Reduce the vision of the MSC to 11 (as with all other flyers). That will help with countering blink play. Make TW an upgrade at Core. That will help with blink all-ins.
Continue tweaking PO (by looking at range and casting range).
But, don't nerf an option that allows for pressure and good active play. The game is worse as a result.
Edit/ Sorry, 30 seconds, I think. I'll have to check that.
|
On February 08 2014 05:43 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2014 03:07 Ghanburighan wrote:
Whitewing and Plansix, the two people I'd like to have balancing the game... I would love getting every fact and complaint responded to with patronising and trolling.
Edit: And IdrA, when still a top foreigner, predicted a number of imbalances, including ghosts getting nerfed almost a year before they were, alongside obvious ones like infestors getting nerfed. So, yes, being good at the game does give you good knowledge of the game. Actually arguing his point with facts and examples makes it much better, of course. In early WOL while zergs were hugely underpresented and Dustin Browder stated that TvZ win/rates were close to 50-50, it was clear for everyone who ignored the useless win/rate statistics (that always goes towards 50/50 regardless of balance) and either looked at more relevant numbers or simply analyzed games, that it was heavily T favored. Blizzad, however, back then acted a bit quicker than they do today and nerfed Reapers and Siege tanks shortly after the patch. Idra, however, kept saying that it still was T favored and argued that it was more imbalanced (prepatch) than most people realized. He was !@#$%^&* right, According to statistics by Aliguac, there was a terran invovled in all non-mirror matchups 70-77% of all games in early WOL compared to 50-55% for zerg --> That indicates that the matchup was heavily T favored. How does that look today? Protoss = 72% and terran = 56% --> T very underpowered. While some of the suggestions Dwf presents might not be neccasary (tactical Nuke), I really think its extremely unlikely that the combo of these suggestions will make the game T favored. I would even argue that the combo of these suggestions are much less drastic than the fungal growth buff that Blizzards gave Zerg in spring 2011. And back then FYI terran representation was around 68%, zerg representation around 65%. Aliguac W/R were slightly T favored (similar to how PvT w/r today are slightly toss favored). So overall, Z wasn't underperforming as badly as T is today, and even later on (after Z representation equalized T representation), Zerg got another buff --> Queen range increased from 3 to 5, which arguably also was a more significant than the combo of Dwf's suggestions. So IMO, either a big change is needed (like a big Hellion buff to buff mech) or it could be a combo of small suggestions, such as what Dwf presents.
I think the change that I would like to see the most is a different way to access balance. With WR we either have a sample size problem or when we don't then it is too insensitive to balance change (better players of the worse race play worse players of the better race)
I think using mirror MU statistics would be a good approach.
|
On February 08 2014 06:14 aZealot wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2014 06:01 ffadicted wrote:On February 08 2014 05:39 Plansix wrote:
If you nerf blink stalker openings and oracle opens to much, you just end up with turtle toss, which no one wants. If Terran needs more options, make that possible through scouting or other routes. Nerfing effective builds is not the way to go. Buffing underused strats is better. You also don't want a game with too many amazing early game/all-in possibilities. Blink is too strong right now, it needs to be looked at. No, thanks. Blink research was already nerfed by about 70 seconds (iirc) in HOTS. Reduce the vision of the MSC to 11 (as with all other flyers). That will help with countering blink play. Make TW an upgrade at Core. That will help with blink all-ins. Continue tweaking PO (by looking at range and casting range). But, don't nerf an option that allows for pressure and good active play. The game is worse as a result.
Exactly. Nerfing builds like blink/oracle only makes the game more dull and bland. Give Terran the tools to respond and not be to far behind and we get a better game as a whole.
|
On February 08 2014 06:18 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2014 06:14 aZealot wrote:On February 08 2014 06:01 ffadicted wrote:On February 08 2014 05:39 Plansix wrote:
If you nerf blink stalker openings and oracle opens to much, you just end up with turtle toss, which no one wants. If Terran needs more options, make that possible through scouting or other routes. Nerfing effective builds is not the way to go. Buffing underused strats is better. You also don't want a game with too many amazing early game/all-in possibilities. Blink is too strong right now, it needs to be looked at. No, thanks. Blink research was already nerfed by about 70 seconds (iirc) in HOTS. Reduce the vision of the MSC to 11 (as with all other flyers). That will help with countering blink play. Make TW an upgrade at Core. That will help with blink all-ins. Continue tweaking PO (by looking at range and casting range). But, don't nerf an option that allows for pressure and good active play. The game is worse as a result. Exactly. Nerfing builds like blink/oracle only makes the game more dull and bland. Give Terran the tools to respond and not be to far behind and we get a better game as a whole.
What would an example of such a "tool" be?
Also fun how Terran should not be "to far behind"  Just... Behind 
|
On February 08 2014 06:19 Glorfindel! wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2014 06:18 Plansix wrote:On February 08 2014 06:14 aZealot wrote:On February 08 2014 06:01 ffadicted wrote:On February 08 2014 05:39 Plansix wrote:
If you nerf blink stalker openings and oracle opens to much, you just end up with turtle toss, which no one wants. If Terran needs more options, make that possible through scouting or other routes. Nerfing effective builds is not the way to go. Buffing underused strats is better. You also don't want a game with too many amazing early game/all-in possibilities. Blink is too strong right now, it needs to be looked at. No, thanks. Blink research was already nerfed by about 70 seconds (iirc) in HOTS. Reduce the vision of the MSC to 11 (as with all other flyers). That will help with countering blink play. Make TW an upgrade at Core. That will help with blink all-ins. Continue tweaking PO (by looking at range and casting range). But, don't nerf an option that allows for pressure and good active play. The game is worse as a result. Exactly. Nerfing builds like blink/oracle only makes the game more dull and bland. Give Terran the tools to respond and not be to far behind and we get a better game as a whole. What would an example of such a "tool" be? Also fun how Terran should not be "to far behind" Just... Behind
It's an all in, if the Terran comes out ahead every time, it's a crappy all in.
And scouting solves a lot of problems. Most if the races can stop anything if they can see it comming. The problem is Protoss gets map control up until the all in hits.
|
On February 08 2014 06:29 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2014 06:19 Glorfindel! wrote:On February 08 2014 06:18 Plansix wrote:On February 08 2014 06:14 aZealot wrote:On February 08 2014 06:01 ffadicted wrote:On February 08 2014 05:39 Plansix wrote:
If you nerf blink stalker openings and oracle opens to much, you just end up with turtle toss, which no one wants. If Terran needs more options, make that possible through scouting or other routes. Nerfing effective builds is not the way to go. Buffing underused strats is better. You also don't want a game with too many amazing early game/all-in possibilities. Blink is too strong right now, it needs to be looked at. No, thanks. Blink research was already nerfed by about 70 seconds (iirc) in HOTS. Reduce the vision of the MSC to 11 (as with all other flyers). That will help with countering blink play. Make TW an upgrade at Core. That will help with blink all-ins. Continue tweaking PO (by looking at range and casting range). But, don't nerf an option that allows for pressure and good active play. The game is worse as a result. Exactly. Nerfing builds like blink/oracle only makes the game more dull and bland. Give Terran the tools to respond and not be to far behind and we get a better game as a whole. What would an example of such a "tool" be? Also fun how Terran should not be "to far behind" Just... Behind It's an all in, if the Terran comes out ahead every time, it's a crappy all in. And scouting solves a lot of problems. Most if the races can stop anything if they can see it comming. The problem is Protoss gets map control up until the all in hits.
That's not very accurate analysis of the situation. The problem is that it's not all-in at the moment, it's just a harass option because a) you can easily transition out of it into storm, and b) even if scouted, it's very difficult to stop - it probably won't kill a terran with 3-4 bunkers, who did a build that's safe against blink (unless the TW are very good), but it can still do damage and contain the terran. So in that sense, there's no real counter to it.
|
2 Base BLink Pressure is EXTREMELY hard to hold even for Pros so what woudl be the Tool? Does Terran Get their Own MSC that can PO their CC? Or have a CC that can seemingly switch between ORb and PF ? LOL
|
Blizzard always seems so passive and distant whenever they do these Q&A sessions. They are posed with questions with ideas that have been thrown around the community for ongoing months, and yet they hardly nudge on balance changes over and over.
I really wish they would allow the community to balance their game but then I also fear for what kind of unwelcomed changes it might bring. *shudder*
|
On February 08 2014 04:48 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2014 04:16 TheDwf wrote:On February 08 2014 03:55 MstrJinbo wrote:On February 08 2014 03:43 Destructicon wrote:On February 08 2014 03:34 MstrJinbo wrote:In conclusion, all the changes are actually not only fair, they are well thought out and complement each other nicely. Instead of bashing on the poster you should at least take the time to refute all his changes point per point, or analyze the synergies and implications of all the changes before crying imba. I swear the number of bronze league "analysis" bashing on GM players is really getting on my nerves lately. I'm going to throw this out since a lot of people are missing the point. The charge of bias was not directed at the balance suggestions but rather at his next statement that even after the laundry list of nerfs to toss and buffs to Terran, the matchup would still favor Protoss. How exactly? You provide no analysis, the combination of weaker protoss all-ins or aggressive options combined with a bigger window of opportunity for terran to do damage would change the balance of power slightly, perhaps force more units and defense from toss earlier, cut down on the greed and allow the terran to enter the mid game on even footing, giving them a way better fighting change. Remember the reverse of this actually happened during HoTS. TvP was more even in the beginning of HoTS because, toss pressure options hadn't been expanded quite as much, they had pre buff warp prisms and oracles and only MSC augmented blinks on not particularly good blink maps. While Toss got stronger defensive options terran also got strong offensive options in the form of speed boost, hellbat drops and WM drops. Slowly as HoTS progressed terran offensive options where nerfed, hellbats, WM and they where only left with speed boost. Meanwhile protoss gained a bit more in the offense department with cheaper Dark Shrine, faster warp prisms, oracles and better blink maps. Reversing even part of those would lead a long, long way to restoring the balance of power between the two races. Again missing the point. People are free to discuss balance suggestions on their own merit. But consider this, blizzard had a patch increasing overlord movement speed and queen range. Following that patch, almost everything about zvt or tvz changed. All the strategies and builds all changed and in ways almost nobody would have predicted. So in that light throwing out a list of 10+ balance changes and then proclaiming that you know the results is somewhat unbelievable. More so when your predicted result is toss will still be ahead. Half the proposed changes have very limited impact. Reapers having +1 sight range, for instance, cannot break the game. Nukes dealing 750 damage to buildings instead of 500 cannot either; they're never used now, and would still be marginal even with this change. Reintroducing Moebius Reactor or partially reverting the Oracle buff [and I still left the acceleration change intact + slighly faster than the original Oracle, so you see, I am not petty at all in my changes] cannot break the game since we've already been there. Decreasing the ridiculous damage Tempests deal to Massive air targets cannot break the game since like 98+% of the TvP are decided before the Tempest stage anyway; and I don't think the new value would prevent them from slaughtering broods in PvZ. Ghosts costing 25 less minerals cannot break the game for obvious reasons. The huge difference is also that the Queen/Overlord patch was made when TvZ was apparently balanced, while my changes would occur when TvP is as bad if not worse than end of WoL TvZ. I am going to detail a bit what I intend to do with the more major changes (stim, warp-ins, Storm). Look: here's the deal. Winrates are currently slightly in protoss's favor. In a game of seconds like SC2, even a slight change can have a big impact. Ghost timings just got way stronger in the game, already templar openings have gotten weaker, and we haven't seen how that will impact the matchup yet. Maybe you are right, maybe you are wrong, we don't know. Reapers getting a +1 sight range is a big buff to terran scouting. Nukes dealing 750 damage to buildings can be a big buff, I don't believe nukes are weak: the reason they aren't used is that terrans generally play a hyper aggressive style and don't generally stalemate. Nukes are great for breaking stalemates. The only reason to buff their damage to buildings is to make them more useful at base harass, which they are already great at. Nukes already clear out spines/spores and cannons. Tempest damage vs. air is entirely for PvP and PvZ, if we don't see BC's there's no point to nerfing it, I don't even know why this is on the table. Tempests need to be able to annihilate colossi. Ghosts just got a buff, they don't need another one. The oracle has basically disappeared from pro PvTs, why does it need a nerf? Attacks of any kind always seem overpowered when the trend of using it first appears: then people figure out how to deal with it correctly and it dies away. If we were still seeing oracle every game I would completely agree with you, but we don't. Is the oracle supposed to be useless against terran? At what point in the game is it supposed to be a worthy investment to make it? Stop and think for a moment: if one small change can have a huge impact (queens getting a range buff, for example), think about what kind of impact other changes can get. Has it occurred to you that if you can EMP the MSC with a ghost timing, there won't be a photon overcharge, for example, or no time warp? Delaying storm research will make templar openings non viable, especially with the buffed ghost timings. We'll be stuck going colossus openings every game where we don't all-in, which basically means we'll be dead to scv pulls again every game. Stim research was nerfed for a reason, there's no reason to un-nerf it. It's probably the single best upgrade in the game.
No wonder you thought the changes would propel Terran to Planet Broken with your game knowledge.
Winrates: I don't care about winrates. People just need to stop with the eternal summoning of winrates. Do you know why "official winrates" were not 30 : 70 for TvZ at the end of WoL despite the imbalance being that bad? Because when a race is overpowered, bad/mediocre players are carried by the race way beyond their real level. But at some point, they meet people that are just so much better than them that they still lose despite their race being heavily favored. Thus they decrease the winrates of the overpowered race, and then people like you, who blindly look at the figures without thinking (a) about the content of the games or (b) considering who is facing who can say: look! it's between 45 and 55, it's balanced! Well no, because the 48,3% in AvB is actually top players of the race A facing subtop players of the race B, and still mostly losing despite being better.
Ghost timings just got way stronger in the midgame
Nope. Even pre-patch, the Ghosts would reach 75 energy while walking across the map (this is the case for 3 Ghosts + SCV pulls for instance), so those Ghost timings were unchanged. There is no viable Ghost timing anyway that would hit before Moebius would be done pre-patch. The main change with Moebius Reactor being free is that Cloak comes earlier, but Cloak does not guarantee you can disable spread Templars with some detection, nor does it mean your army will prevail even if most of the Storms are taken care of. Templar openings are not at all weaker after the free Moebius Reactor and will remain the main standard since they don't have the vulnerability of some Colossi styles to SCV pulls.
Reapers getting a +1 sight range is a big buff to terran scouting.
Lol. Please. It's just so that you have better chances to see the back of the base against buildings blocking access (Protoss are starting to build their gate, core and pylons in such a way Reapers have to go through the Probes, and they can trap the Reaper, preventing scouting). Reapers having 10 sight range instead of 9 won't prevent Protoss from randomly proxying a Stargate or a Dark shrine somewhere on the map, and it won't even improve the scouting issues of openings like 1-1-1 expand, 1 rax FE or CC first. The fact you dare call me biased while saying "Reapers +1 sight range is a big buff to terran scouting" is absolutely hilarious. It's a completely harmless change yet you're already raising your pitchfork as if I was giving Terran maphack, when your race has an early game flying unit with the sight radius of a scan, hallucinated Phoenixes without any research, Oracles and Observers. Entitled much?
Nukes dealing 750 damage to buildings can be a big buff, I don't believe nukes are weak
C'mon... You have to be joking. You can't even chain two Nukes in the same area against a competent opponent. This change is mostly cosmetic (it's just to make Nuke harass a bit more rewarding by lategame) yet you're already concerned it might be too strong?
Tempest damage vs. air is entirely for PvP and PvZ, if we don't see BC's there's no point to nerfing it, I don't even know why this is on the table. Tempests need to be able to annihilate colossi
Didn't it occur to you that we never see Battlecruisers precisely because Tempests would one-shot them from the safety of the Protoss deathball? The Tempest change is aimed at giving Terran a possibility in lategame, one they had in WoL; it would still be extremely rare as Battlecruisers transitions would be very difficult, and Feedback would still be a pain or at least disable Yamato through self-removal of the energy, yet again for such a minor change you're already summoning the holy Grail of the excuses to skip Protoss nerfs, aka PvP. Guess what? I don't care about PvP. At all. It's a mirror match-up, thus by definition imbalance cannot be an issue; unless the changes make it as obnoxious as 2011 PvP or TvT during the days of 2-4 Hellbat drops, the non-mirror match-up is by far the priority. Or what would you say to Zergs advocating 100/25 hydras just because it might make ZvZ vaguely better? Would you accept getting trashed each game by unstoppable hydras timings just so 5 extra viewers might not skip the exciting "who has the better concave" games between Tefel and Lambo?
Ghosts just got a buff, they don't need another one.
They do. They're too expensive. A cheaper Ghost would also help a bit Terran by lategame when they try to build the extremely expensive Ghosts/Vikings armies. I propose only -25 minerals, does it sound like something game-breaking? 500 extra minerals for 20 Ghosts is hardly the height of luxury.
The oracle has basically disappeared from pro PvTs, why does it need a nerf?
What? You live in fairy tales if you think Oracles have disappeared. That being said, technically you're right but for the wrong reason. Why do we see less Oracles lately in Korean PvTs? Because Oracles are "figured out" and weak? No, because Blink is even more broken on some maps. Thus Protoss players skip Stargate and opt for the best strategy, building a Council into Terran being in pain, wondering if Protoss is committing, taking a third or teching Storm. As for why Oracles need a nerf, ask your Protoss comrades: many of them are literally begging for the Oracle buff to be reverted.
Has it occurred to you that if you can EMP the MSC with a ghost timing, there won't be a photon overcharge, for example, or no time warp?
Yeah, right. Perhaps in Gold league games, the MSC is lazily idling one screen ahead of the natural, graciously waiting to be EMP'ed, but at high level it's always safely parked in such a way it's absolutely unreachable and can swiftly cast PO at the natural. See below:
On February 07 2014 05:32 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On February 06 2014 04:20 noSec wrote:
Hey guys,
With the new patch is it possible to do something like an early "Marine, Ghost Stim timing push" ? Maybe revamp that 10 minutes push... Nope. Ghost stim timings are dead since the EMP nerf and they will not come back since they exploited the fact Protoss' defence relied on 4-6 Sentries at this time (with the old radius of EMP being wide enough to remove every bit of shield and energy if the Protoss army was caught in a ball). The MSC is out of reach and you would sacrifice so much to have those 2 Ghosts that Protoss would have no troubles defending your push with PO + his units, even if his Sentries are nullified.
Delaying storm research will make templar openings non viable, especially with the buffed ghost timings.
Nope, see the already huge differences in Storm timings in the existing builds (meaning there's no razor-edge critical timing, even against 5 rax pressure) + the arguments above about why early Ghosts timings are not viable.
Stim research was nerfed for a reason, there's no reason to un-nerf it.
Stim research was nerfed in March 2011, when there were still maps like Metalopolis and Xel'Naga Caverns in the map pool, i. e. short rush distance and wide open natural which of course made Forcefield-based defence a nightmare against things like 3 rax timings. Are we still here now? No. Long gone are those days. Thus there is every reason to un-nerf one of the main Terran anti-allin tools, especially as it can also fix, if only by threat, the current impunity of some Protoss openings.
|
Parting vs TY on Frost is the PERFECT example that once Protoss does not make too many mistakes, Terran cannot win the GAME! Literally, has absolutely 0 chances.
Korean qualifiers shows also another thing, once 2 players are evenly matched T will most probably lose:
TY - Parting, Flash - Zest, Inno - Soulkey, Bbyong - Soulkey etc, and it is all after the patch.
Also today Lennock showed how to counter mech. 40 mutas counter like unlimited number of Thors :-)
|
On February 08 2014 06:38 TW wrote:
Parting vs TY on Frost is the PERFECT example that once Protoss does not make too many mistakes, Terran cannot win the GAME! Literally, has absolutely 0 chances.
Korean qualifiers shows also another thing, once 2 players are evenly matched T will most probably lose:
TY - Parting, Flash - Zest, Inno - Soulkey, Bbyong - Soulkey etc, and it is all after the patch.
Also today Lennock showed how to counter mech. 40 mutas counter like unlimited number of Thors :-)
It was not really unlimited, more like 8-9.
|
On February 08 2014 06:42 Glorfindel! wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2014 06:38 TW wrote:
Parting vs TY on Frost is the PERFECT example that once Protoss does not make too many mistakes, Terran cannot win the GAME! Literally, has absolutely 0 chances.
Korean qualifiers shows also another thing, once 2 players are evenly matched T will most probably lose:
TY - Parting, Flash - Zest, Inno - Soulkey, Bbyong - Soulkey etc, and it is all after the patch.
Also today Lennock showed how to counter mech. 40 mutas counter like unlimited number of Thors :-) It was not really unlimited, more like 8-9.
More precisely, it was 12 thors, which is to say that mutas trade with thors roughly supply-efficiently. The only way you will win a large-scale thor v muta fight is when you have way more supply in thors than the Z has in muta (workers sacked, timing, etc).
I'm not certain about the role of upgrades, though. Soulkey v Inno showed that 3-3 muta versus 3-3 thor seemed to be more lopsided towards the muta. Supernova cancelled Leenock's +2 armor upgrade, so I think the fight was 2-2 thors v 2-1 muta (can't check this now).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
