|
On February 12 2014 04:44 Ghanburighan wrote:Hmm, this was a very interesting read. You should probably also include Khaldor's video of Mana. On the other hand, Desrow's borders on the ridiculous. If he has a good reason to predict this, he should really elaborate on it, because literally no-one else believes it.
The widowmine damage bypasses the hardened shield of the immortal which is the backbone of the protoss army composition vs Mech. I think it will make it much harder and might make it too strong. Blizzard talks about widowmine with bio but they overlooked what it could do to Mech vs P.
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
Don't mind any of the Protoss nerfs except the blink one, that seems so silly to me. Stalkers' only utility past the very early game is blink, because their DPS is just so bad. It's such a large overall nerf which seems unnecessary to think about when Blizzard are nerfing Protoss elsewhere. And any nerf that reduces micro potential probably isn't a good one.
|
Canada13389 Posts
On February 12 2014 06:24 Survivor61316 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2014 06:19 ZeromuS wrote:On February 12 2014 06:03 Ghanburighan wrote:On February 12 2014 05:23 ZeromuS wrote:On February 12 2014 05:13 tenklavir wrote:On February 12 2014 05:00 ZeromuS wrote:On February 12 2014 04:19 avilo wrote:On February 12 2014 03:53 NonY wrote:
Big thing about the blink cooldown change is mobility. Blink stalkers are typically pretty safe to explore the map, even when marauders or ling/roach could also be on the field. However, it's the second blink that really gets you to safety when running from those things. If the second blink is delayed 5 seconds, I think it'll force protoss to be much more passive with stalkers. It crosses a threshold where you run a risk of the stalkers getting caught and they all die.
In my opinion, Blizzard clearly isn't just targeting the PvT blink all-ins with the blink change. But why they would want to nerf blink in general is beyond me. Stalkers kinda suck in general. They're a niche unit that becomes viable in a decent number of situations only because of blink. The problem is right now there's no risk at all to really using blink stalkers in PvT. You can virtually always escape every single time either from the Terran's base after offensive blinks, or you can do the fake blink macro builds and never lose any stalkers but still heavily pressure Terran at no risk whatsoever to yourself. Making blink require more thought to use and have more risk associated to it will go a long way to help TvP balance because right now the balance of TvP is quite abysmal. There are too, too many PvT openings that have low risks associated with them, blink probably being the one that almost always puts the Protoss player ahead, or at the very worst even which is pretty lame. With 9 range vision the MsC cannot provide adequate vision from a safe range of the positioning of all of terran forces. This means protoss players cannot blink into a terran base with full knowledge of the terran army position every time without also gaining extra info from a poke at the front for example to see what is there. If protoss does want that vision of terran base they must commit the MsC close enough that it is danger of taking damage or being killed. Why exactly is Protoss entitled to a safe blink into the Terran base? The whole idea is that there should be some risk involved in this kind of play, which is exactly why so many Terran hate (and continue to hate) the Oracle change - an aggressive, potentially high-reward play should come with some degree of risk.
I am specifically mentioning how the MsC nerf is already adding a lot more risk to the blink options vs Terran. I don't see what you are arguing?
If you cant see everything its not a free safe blink. This provides more chances for terran to abuse either the more limited vision of the mama core leading to quick poor blink decisions or for terran to damage or kill the mothership core.
Further the widow mine change means its even more effective vs one base blink all ins if the terran player has a fact coming see Twilight or a lot of stalkers and no natural.
Will it help vs blink expands? Not specifically, I mean, Protoss can still make 6 - 8 stalkers off 2 base with blink and pressure terran while taking a third, but that build doesnt get a lot of gates. If the Protoss player gets a lot of gates and doesnt commit to a big attack instead expanding with 2 gas to a third base terran should have a timing to hurt the protoss player in some way or get ahead in tech/upgrades pretty easily. The reaction from terran will require scouting and reaction to that scouting which is a metagame thing that slowly evolves and grows as the Terrans deal with it more. But thats different from balance, thats an issue of understanding from both sides. Once terran figures out the reaction Protoss will either stop doing it or retool the build to be more safe allowing terran less timing options, but more stable opportunities to expand or not lose much to the small stalker squad assuming good reactions. Thats how the game evolves
On February 12 2014 05:23 Plansix wrote:On February 12 2014 05:18 TimKim0713 wrote:
Why so low terran contributors...
Need korean opinions as well As always, teamliquid get the answers from people that respond. I am sure they would be happy to publish any pros opinion if they took the time to write it down. YES! We had a shorter deadline for this one and a few things compound the smaller number of terrans: - fewer foreign terrans than the other races in general - fewer terrans willing to provide feedback in general (we hope as these releases get more positive answers, people open up to contributing) - some Koreans who were available and willing this time provided either limited comments or ones that were a little off topic or not related to this patch noteSo I hope you can understand. If any pro Terrans want to contribute to the next one PM and I will try to include you in the next one, as long as you have a decently level head, as we try to focus on people who can consolidate their race bias and look at the game a little more objectively (pure objectivity is impossible though so we take that with a grain of salt) Are you saying that some Korean terrans did contribute but you didn't include them in the OP? Why would you do that? Even if it's off topic or ``limited'' (whatever that means), at least we understand what they're thinking about. In the end, those guys did want to give you their feedback. We need to remember that Koreans are not magical creatures from a far away land. They can be just as biased as any one else, and the language barrier doesn't help. We also still need people to be willing to take part and answer. I had as my aim to ask people who are generally not going to be extremely biased and I feel as though I succeeded in that regard. And yet you asked desrow?
He is not very biased in his answers. Just because he explains things from the Protoss perspective does not mean he is biased.
With regards to his mothership core comments he mentions it is debated amongst players (which is true, some players do debate the change -- see Socke and HasuObs who mention that the vision radius change will impact every matchup, scouting early PvP before hallucination and impact positioning before fights in all Protoss matchups).
Desrow also mentions how if it is purely being changed as a deterrent to blink all ins it is not necessarily the correct direction. Maps should also be looked at. He mentions habitation station as an example NOT because of the size of the main (which others have extrapolated) but because of the limited area with which to blink into the base. The power from blink all ins comes from positioning as well as vision (hence why KT.TY uses sensor towers to defend the 2 base variant effectively). If you remove options for where to blink in Terran doesn't need to invest as much into defending as large an area meaning protoss players can't just pressure with an all in infrastructure and expand instead because terran sacrificed any follow up timing through their adequate (then over) preparation.
desRow always seems to have more haters when he is public with his opinions but his comments aren't the most biased (and everyone is a little biased, very few people can be completely objective).
+ Show Spoiler +On February 12 2014 06:31 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2014 06:19 ZeromuS wrote:On February 12 2014 06:03 Ghanburighan wrote:On February 12 2014 05:23 ZeromuS wrote:On February 12 2014 05:13 tenklavir wrote:On February 12 2014 05:00 ZeromuS wrote:On February 12 2014 04:19 avilo wrote:On February 12 2014 03:53 NonY wrote:
Big thing about the blink cooldown change is mobility. Blink stalkers are typically pretty safe to explore the map, even when marauders or ling/roach could also be on the field. However, it's the second blink that really gets you to safety when running from those things. If the second blink is delayed 5 seconds, I think it'll force protoss to be much more passive with stalkers. It crosses a threshold where you run a risk of the stalkers getting caught and they all die.
In my opinion, Blizzard clearly isn't just targeting the PvT blink all-ins with the blink change. But why they would want to nerf blink in general is beyond me. Stalkers kinda suck in general. They're a niche unit that becomes viable in a decent number of situations only because of blink. The problem is right now there's no risk at all to really using blink stalkers in PvT. You can virtually always escape every single time either from the Terran's base after offensive blinks, or you can do the fake blink macro builds and never lose any stalkers but still heavily pressure Terran at no risk whatsoever to yourself. Making blink require more thought to use and have more risk associated to it will go a long way to help TvP balance because right now the balance of TvP is quite abysmal. There are too, too many PvT openings that have low risks associated with them, blink probably being the one that almost always puts the Protoss player ahead, or at the very worst even which is pretty lame. With 9 range vision the MsC cannot provide adequate vision from a safe range of the positioning of all of terran forces. This means protoss players cannot blink into a terran base with full knowledge of the terran army position every time without also gaining extra info from a poke at the front for example to see what is there. If protoss does want that vision of terran base they must commit the MsC close enough that it is danger of taking damage or being killed. Why exactly is Protoss entitled to a safe blink into the Terran base? The whole idea is that there should be some risk involved in this kind of play, which is exactly why so many Terran hate (and continue to hate) the Oracle change - an aggressive, potentially high-reward play should come with some degree of risk.
I am specifically mentioning how the MsC nerf is already adding a lot more risk to the blink options vs Terran. I don't see what you are arguing?
If you cant see everything its not a free safe blink. This provides more chances for terran to abuse either the more limited vision of the mama core leading to quick poor blink decisions or for terran to damage or kill the mothership core.
Further the widow mine change means its even more effective vs one base blink all ins if the terran player has a fact coming see Twilight or a lot of stalkers and no natural.
Will it help vs blink expands? Not specifically, I mean, Protoss can still make 6 - 8 stalkers off 2 base with blink and pressure terran while taking a third, but that build doesnt get a lot of gates. If the Protoss player gets a lot of gates and doesnt commit to a big attack instead expanding with 2 gas to a third base terran should have a timing to hurt the protoss player in some way or get ahead in tech/upgrades pretty easily. The reaction from terran will require scouting and reaction to that scouting which is a metagame thing that slowly evolves and grows as the Terrans deal with it more. But thats different from balance, thats an issue of understanding from both sides. Once terran figures out the reaction Protoss will either stop doing it or retool the build to be more safe allowing terran less timing options, but more stable opportunities to expand or not lose much to the small stalker squad assuming good reactions. Thats how the game evolves
On February 12 2014 05:23 Plansix wrote:On February 12 2014 05:18 TimKim0713 wrote:
Why so low terran contributors...
Need korean opinions as well As always, teamliquid get the answers from people that respond. I am sure they would be happy to publish any pros opinion if they took the time to write it down. YES! We had a shorter deadline for this one and a few things compound the smaller number of terrans: - fewer foreign terrans than the other races in general - fewer terrans willing to provide feedback in general (we hope as these releases get more positive answers, people open up to contributing) - some Koreans who were available and willing this time provided either limited comments or ones that were a little off topic or not related to this patch noteSo I hope you can understand. If any pro Terrans want to contribute to the next one PM and I will try to include you in the next one, as long as you have a decently level head, as we try to focus on people who can consolidate their race bias and look at the game a little more objectively (pure objectivity is impossible though so we take that with a grain of salt) Are you saying that some Korean terrans did contribute but you didn't include them in the OP? Why would you do that? Even if it's off topic or ``limited'' (whatever that means), at least we understand what they're thinking about. In the end, those guys did want to give you their feedback. I think its fair to reserve some editorial judgement. And I have always believed in being very open. When I say limited, I mean the full impact of the potential change was either not expressed well. Keep in mind we do not have access to every single pro player, and Waxangel does not always have the ability to converse with the Koreans in Hangul because he does live a life. We wanted to release this quickly while it is still pertinent and to give the community some additional perspectives to digest, which is a goal I feel we achieved. There are a series of varying opinions from different races and for the most part everyone was quite objective (as much as possible) and provided different perspectives and reasoning. Jjakji chose not to make a comment. Ryung and Crank were unavailable considering our timeline. MMA provided some comments and they are included as you can see in the article. As for your concerns regarding not including information here is a very good example from Mouz Dear: "if sc2 need protoss nerf , first of all DK must do oracle roll back if it will be changed , specially blink cool down .. toss will be stupid" (via SeoHyun via Nathanias) With limited access we only have so much we can do to contact and enter into discussion to clarify things. On its own, this time we didn't get very easily understood or clear feedback. So here we see a recommendation to nerf the oracle (which is outside the scope of our article and not its aim) and we also see no mention of mothership core. We get a mention of "blink cooldown .. toss will be stupid", while the intention is there that its a bad change, it adds very little to overall article and no additional information that isn't already presented more eloquently and with more nuance than the English speaking professional players we asked. We need to remember that Koreans are not magical creatures from a far away land. They can be just as biased as any one else, and the language barrier doesn't help. We also still need people to be willing to take part and answer. I had as my aim to ask people who are generally not going to be extremely biased and I feel as though I succeeded in that regard. I see you have good intentions and overall it's an excellent initiative, but I think you've taken a wrong turn for all the right reasons. I find Dear's response excellent content. Sure, it would be nice if it were more detailed and elaborate, but the idea that these changes as a whole will not lead to a balancing of TvP and the fact that, in his mind, an oracle change will bring about balance, is something I like to know, and I assume that DK would like to know as well. As for excluding people because they are biased, once again, I don't see the responses, so I don't know exactly, but the idea is that if you have a large number of responses, especially from different races, it balances itself out. As I commented before, I do not think Desrow's comments are as unbiased as, for example, TLO's or Qxc's, but it's still valuable content to see how he thinks in his context. I'd like to see similar content from terrans, if only to counter-balance the comments from the large number of protoss players. In the end, I would not put too much emphasis on eloquence and rather get feedback from the highest level. This partly comes from my experience in diplomacy, the highest officials in the EU, WTO, UN, etc. are not very eloquent and easy to communicate with, but deciphering their comments is incredibly valuable because they are the ones performing the most important actions.
I'll add once more, the comment didnt add anything to the conversation and is outside the scope. Wanting an oracle change or different changes completely is a seperate concern for perhaps another day and another time, but really I am looking at these changes.
|
On February 12 2014 06:31 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2014 06:19 ZeromuS wrote:On February 12 2014 06:03 Ghanburighan wrote:On February 12 2014 05:23 ZeromuS wrote:On February 12 2014 05:13 tenklavir wrote:On February 12 2014 05:00 ZeromuS wrote:On February 12 2014 04:19 avilo wrote:On February 12 2014 03:53 NonY wrote:
Big thing about the blink cooldown change is mobility. Blink stalkers are typically pretty safe to explore the map, even when marauders or ling/roach could also be on the field. However, it's the second blink that really gets you to safety when running from those things. If the second blink is delayed 5 seconds, I think it'll force protoss to be much more passive with stalkers. It crosses a threshold where you run a risk of the stalkers getting caught and they all die.
In my opinion, Blizzard clearly isn't just targeting the PvT blink all-ins with the blink change. But why they would want to nerf blink in general is beyond me. Stalkers kinda suck in general. They're a niche unit that becomes viable in a decent number of situations only because of blink. The problem is right now there's no risk at all to really using blink stalkers in PvT. You can virtually always escape every single time either from the Terran's base after offensive blinks, or you can do the fake blink macro builds and never lose any stalkers but still heavily pressure Terran at no risk whatsoever to yourself. Making blink require more thought to use and have more risk associated to it will go a long way to help TvP balance because right now the balance of TvP is quite abysmal. There are too, too many PvT openings that have low risks associated with them, blink probably being the one that almost always puts the Protoss player ahead, or at the very worst even which is pretty lame. With 9 range vision the MsC cannot provide adequate vision from a safe range of the positioning of all of terran forces. This means protoss players cannot blink into a terran base with full knowledge of the terran army position every time without also gaining extra info from a poke at the front for example to see what is there. If protoss does want that vision of terran base they must commit the MsC close enough that it is danger of taking damage or being killed. Why exactly is Protoss entitled to a safe blink into the Terran base? The whole idea is that there should be some risk involved in this kind of play, which is exactly why so many Terran hate (and continue to hate) the Oracle change - an aggressive, potentially high-reward play should come with some degree of risk.
I am specifically mentioning how the MsC nerf is already adding a lot more risk to the blink options vs Terran. I don't see what you are arguing?
If you cant see everything its not a free safe blink. This provides more chances for terran to abuse either the more limited vision of the mama core leading to quick poor blink decisions or for terran to damage or kill the mothership core.
Further the widow mine change means its even more effective vs one base blink all ins if the terran player has a fact coming see Twilight or a lot of stalkers and no natural.
Will it help vs blink expands? Not specifically, I mean, Protoss can still make 6 - 8 stalkers off 2 base with blink and pressure terran while taking a third, but that build doesnt get a lot of gates. If the Protoss player gets a lot of gates and doesnt commit to a big attack instead expanding with 2 gas to a third base terran should have a timing to hurt the protoss player in some way or get ahead in tech/upgrades pretty easily. The reaction from terran will require scouting and reaction to that scouting which is a metagame thing that slowly evolves and grows as the Terrans deal with it more. But thats different from balance, thats an issue of understanding from both sides. Once terran figures out the reaction Protoss will either stop doing it or retool the build to be more safe allowing terran less timing options, but more stable opportunities to expand or not lose much to the small stalker squad assuming good reactions. Thats how the game evolves
On February 12 2014 05:23 Plansix wrote:On February 12 2014 05:18 TimKim0713 wrote:
Why so low terran contributors...
Need korean opinions as well As always, teamliquid get the answers from people that respond. I am sure they would be happy to publish any pros opinion if they took the time to write it down. YES! We had a shorter deadline for this one and a few things compound the smaller number of terrans: - fewer foreign terrans than the other races in general - fewer terrans willing to provide feedback in general (we hope as these releases get more positive answers, people open up to contributing) - some Koreans who were available and willing this time provided either limited comments or ones that were a little off topic or not related to this patch noteSo I hope you can understand. If any pro Terrans want to contribute to the next one PM and I will try to include you in the next one, as long as you have a decently level head, as we try to focus on people who can consolidate their race bias and look at the game a little more objectively (pure objectivity is impossible though so we take that with a grain of salt) Are you saying that some Korean terrans did contribute but you didn't include them in the OP? Why would you do that? Even if it's off topic or ``limited'' (whatever that means), at least we understand what they're thinking about. In the end, those guys did want to give you their feedback. I think its fair to reserve some editorial judgement. And I have always believed in being very open. When I say limited, I mean the full impact of the potential change was either not expressed well. Keep in mind we do not have access to every single pro player, and Waxangel does not always have the ability to converse with the Koreans in Hangul because he does live a life. We wanted to release this quickly while it is still pertinent and to give the community some additional perspectives to digest, which is a goal I feel we achieved. There are a series of varying opinions from different races and for the most part everyone was quite objective (as much as possible) and provided different perspectives and reasoning. Jjakji chose not to make a comment. Ryung and Crank were unavailable considering our timeline. MMA provided some comments and they are included as you can see in the article. As for your concerns regarding not including information here is a very good example from Mouz Dear: "if sc2 need protoss nerf , first of all DK must do oracle roll back if it will be changed , specially blink cool down .. toss will be stupid" (via SeoHyun via Nathanias) With limited access we only have so much we can do to contact and enter into discussion to clarify things. On its own, this time we didn't get very easily understood or clear feedback. So here we see a recommendation to nerf the oracle (which is outside the scope of our article and not its aim) and we also see no mention of mothership core. We get a mention of "blink cooldown .. toss will be stupid", while the intention is there that its a bad change, it adds very little to overall article and no additional information that isn't already presented more eloquently and with more nuance than the English speaking professional players we asked. We need to remember that Koreans are not magical creatures from a far away land. They can be just as biased as any one else, and the language barrier doesn't help. We also still need people to be willing to take part and answer. I had as my aim to ask people who are generally not going to be extremely biased and I feel as though I succeeded in that regard. I see you have good intentions and overall it's an excellent initiative, but I think you've taken a wrong turn for all the right reasons. I find Dear's response excellent content. Sure, it would be nice if it were more detailed and elaborate, but the idea that these changes as a whole will not lead to a balancing of TvP and the fact that, in his mind, an oracle change will bring about balance, is something I like to know, and I assume that DK would like to know as well. As for excluding people because they are biased, once again, I don't see the responses, so I don't know exactly, but the idea is that if you have a large number of responses, especially from different races, it balances itself out. As I commented before, I do not think Desrow's comments are as unbiased as, for example, TLO's or Qxc's, but it's still valuable content to see how he thinks in his context. I'd like to see similar content from terrans, if only to counter-balance the comments from the large number of protoss players. In the end, I would not put too much emphasis on eloquence and rather get feedback from the highest level. This partly comes from my experience in diplomacy, the highest officials in the EU, WTO, UN, etc. are not very eloquent and easy to communicate with, but deciphering their comments is incredibly valuable because they are the ones performing the most important actions.
I am of the opposite opinion, I have no intrest in pro bias and them complaining about an upcomming patch. If I want to hear bias balance complaints, I'll just read the forums.
|
On February 12 2014 06:34 desRow wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2014 04:44 Ghanburighan wrote:Hmm, this was a very interesting read. You should probably also include Khaldor's video of Mana. On the other hand, Desrow's I fear this widow mine buff will make mech slightly too strong vs Protoss borders on the ridiculous. If he has a good reason to predict this, he should really elaborate on it, because literally no-one else believes it. The widowmine damage bypasses the hardened shield of the immortal which is the backbone of the protoss army composition vs Mech. I think it will make it much harder and might make it too strong. Blizzard talks about widowmine with bio but they overlooked what it could do to Mech vs P.
Thank you for the elaboration!
I'm guessing you mean a mech composition where WM are in front of a tank line such that the WM cannot be picked off for free with the superior range of the immortals.
I have no experience with WM-tank lines, anyone else care to comment?
|
As long as Protoss can blink stalkers up cliffs they're gonna do blink stalker builds, I suspect. And as long as they can potentially do them they can also keep doing the obnoxious blink-all-in-but-not-really-because-you-scouted-it-I'll-just-make-2-forges-and-get-storm-have-fun-behind-ur-bunkers-hahahahahahah style of play. I wouldn't mind an artificial solution to this style of play, like a kind of cliff that couldn't be blinked up.
This obviously won't happen and I foresee the loss of many, many ladder points (and the brain cells required for sanity) to the blinky little fucks.
Widow mine change is incredible though. Like that one!
|
On February 12 2014 06:34 desRow wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2014 04:44 Ghanburighan wrote:Hmm, this was a very interesting read. You should probably also include Khaldor's video of Mana. On the other hand, Desrow's I fear this widow mine buff will make mech slightly too strong vs Protoss borders on the ridiculous. If he has a good reason to predict this, he should really elaborate on it, because literally no-one else believes it. The widowmine damage bypasses the hardened shield of the immortal which is the backbone of the protoss army composition vs Mech. I think it will make it much harder and might make it too strong. Blizzard talks about widowmine with bio but they overlooked what it could do to Mech vs P.
Immortal getting nerfed against mech is a great thing, though. It was brought into the game specifically as a hard counter -- to be OP against mech. Turns out, Protoss deal pretty well with mech in general, so they don't need a unit to shut it down hard. IF this change does as much as you predict, that would be freaking awesome! Mech as standard in PvT could do a lot for the match up.
|
On February 12 2014 06:14 Survivor61316 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2014 05:56 Waise wrote:On February 12 2014 05:25 Survivor61316 wrote:On February 12 2014 05:00 Waise wrote:On February 12 2014 04:53 Survivor61316 wrote:
I'm sorry qxc, but those were some terrible proposed changes to the sh..
Why don't they just decrease the time between waves and shorten the timer until the locusts die. Zerg would no longer be able to hit you with free units from 1/3 the way across the map, and would have to keep their sh much closer to the opponents army. Combine this with a reduction to the burrow time for the swarm host, and suddenly Zergs have to continue to reposition them, which doesnt allow for them to just passively keep them next to a great wall of spores and spines. Also, a quicker burrow time would mean that they could be used for hit and run tactics around the map, which should add to the watchability/playability of the MU. zerg already has to aggressively reposition their SH to succeed in high level play. SH already require good multitasking and map awareness. this is not the issue with SH at all. please stop suggesting this No they don't. They plant them and thats about the end of it. Thats why they can also plant static d, because the sh aren't going anywhere anytime soon. they plant static d AROUND THE MAP so the swarm hosts can be MOVED around the map without support from the rest of the army. do you even watch pro level swarm host games? what you're saying is simply not true of high level play. if you're losing to zergs who never move their swarm hosts, your problem is with your own play, not theirs. I play Terran man, I only know about this style from watching "high level" pro games..
then you are not paying attention. no pro zerg just lets their swarm hosts sit in place until it reaches the phase of the game where creep and static d are literally on every inch of the map, and at that point the game is usually over anyway because zerg just mines the map. did you watch soulkey vs reality?
and playing terran has nothing to do with it, how am i supposed to know if you play mech or not? terran mech vs swarm host is current pro meta, so i don't see your point
|
On February 12 2014 06:34 ZeromuS wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2014 06:24 Survivor61316 wrote:On February 12 2014 06:19 ZeromuS wrote:On February 12 2014 06:03 Ghanburighan wrote:On February 12 2014 05:23 ZeromuS wrote:On February 12 2014 05:13 tenklavir wrote:On February 12 2014 05:00 ZeromuS wrote:On February 12 2014 04:19 avilo wrote:On February 12 2014 03:53 NonY wrote:
Big thing about the blink cooldown change is mobility. Blink stalkers are typically pretty safe to explore the map, even when marauders or ling/roach could also be on the field. However, it's the second blink that really gets you to safety when running from those things. If the second blink is delayed 5 seconds, I think it'll force protoss to be much more passive with stalkers. It crosses a threshold where you run a risk of the stalkers getting caught and they all die.
In my opinion, Blizzard clearly isn't just targeting the PvT blink all-ins with the blink change. But why they would want to nerf blink in general is beyond me. Stalkers kinda suck in general. They're a niche unit that becomes viable in a decent number of situations only because of blink. The problem is right now there's no risk at all to really using blink stalkers in PvT. You can virtually always escape every single time either from the Terran's base after offensive blinks, or you can do the fake blink macro builds and never lose any stalkers but still heavily pressure Terran at no risk whatsoever to yourself. Making blink require more thought to use and have more risk associated to it will go a long way to help TvP balance because right now the balance of TvP is quite abysmal. There are too, too many PvT openings that have low risks associated with them, blink probably being the one that almost always puts the Protoss player ahead, or at the very worst even which is pretty lame. With 9 range vision the MsC cannot provide adequate vision from a safe range of the positioning of all of terran forces. This means protoss players cannot blink into a terran base with full knowledge of the terran army position every time without also gaining extra info from a poke at the front for example to see what is there. If protoss does want that vision of terran base they must commit the MsC close enough that it is danger of taking damage or being killed. Why exactly is Protoss entitled to a safe blink into the Terran base? The whole idea is that there should be some risk involved in this kind of play, which is exactly why so many Terran hate (and continue to hate) the Oracle change - an aggressive, potentially high-reward play should come with some degree of risk.
I am specifically mentioning how the MsC nerf is already adding a lot more risk to the blink options vs Terran. I don't see what you are arguing?
If you cant see everything its not a free safe blink. This provides more chances for terran to abuse either the more limited vision of the mama core leading to quick poor blink decisions or for terran to damage or kill the mothership core.
Further the widow mine change means its even more effective vs one base blink all ins if the terran player has a fact coming see Twilight or a lot of stalkers and no natural.
Will it help vs blink expands? Not specifically, I mean, Protoss can still make 6 - 8 stalkers off 2 base with blink and pressure terran while taking a third, but that build doesnt get a lot of gates. If the Protoss player gets a lot of gates and doesnt commit to a big attack instead expanding with 2 gas to a third base terran should have a timing to hurt the protoss player in some way or get ahead in tech/upgrades pretty easily. The reaction from terran will require scouting and reaction to that scouting which is a metagame thing that slowly evolves and grows as the Terrans deal with it more. But thats different from balance, thats an issue of understanding from both sides. Once terran figures out the reaction Protoss will either stop doing it or retool the build to be more safe allowing terran less timing options, but more stable opportunities to expand or not lose much to the small stalker squad assuming good reactions. Thats how the game evolves
On February 12 2014 05:23 Plansix wrote:On February 12 2014 05:18 TimKim0713 wrote:
Why so low terran contributors...
Need korean opinions as well As always, teamliquid get the answers from people that respond. I am sure they would be happy to publish any pros opinion if they took the time to write it down. YES! We had a shorter deadline for this one and a few things compound the smaller number of terrans: - fewer foreign terrans than the other races in general - fewer terrans willing to provide feedback in general (we hope as these releases get more positive answers, people open up to contributing) - some Koreans who were available and willing this time provided either limited comments or ones that were a little off topic or not related to this patch noteSo I hope you can understand. If any pro Terrans want to contribute to the next one PM and I will try to include you in the next one, as long as you have a decently level head, as we try to focus on people who can consolidate their race bias and look at the game a little more objectively (pure objectivity is impossible though so we take that with a grain of salt) Are you saying that some Korean terrans did contribute but you didn't include them in the OP? Why would you do that? Even if it's off topic or ``limited'' (whatever that means), at least we understand what they're thinking about. In the end, those guys did want to give you their feedback. We need to remember that Koreans are not magical creatures from a far away land. They can be just as biased as any one else, and the language barrier doesn't help. We also still need people to be willing to take part and answer. I had as my aim to ask people who are generally not going to be extremely biased and I feel as though I succeeded in that regard. And yet you asked desrow? He is not very biased in his answers. Just because he explains things from the Protoss perspective does not mean he is biased. With regards to his mothership core comments he mentions it is debated amongst players (which is true, some players do debate the change -- see Socke and HasuObs who mention that the vision radius change will impact every matchup, scouting early PvP before hallucination and impact positioning before fights in all Protoss matchups). Desrow also mentions how if it is purely being changed as a deterrent to blink all ins it is not necessarily the correct direction. Maps should also be looked at. He mentions habitation station as an example NOT because of the size of the main (which others have extrapolated) but because of the limited area with which to blink into the base. The power from blink all ins comes from positioning as well as vision (hence why KT.TY uses sensor towers to defend the 2 base variant effectively). If you remove options for where to blink in Terran doesn't need to invest as much into defending as large an area meaning protoss players can't just pressure with an all in infrastructure and expand instead because terran sacrificed any follow up timing through their adequate (then over) preparation. desRow always seems to have more haters when he is public with his opinions but his comments aren't the most biased (and everyone is a little biased, very few people can be completely objective). + Show Spoiler +On February 12 2014 06:31 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2014 06:19 ZeromuS wrote:On February 12 2014 06:03 Ghanburighan wrote:On February 12 2014 05:23 ZeromuS wrote:On February 12 2014 05:13 tenklavir wrote:On February 12 2014 05:00 ZeromuS wrote:On February 12 2014 04:19 avilo wrote:On February 12 2014 03:53 NonY wrote:
Big thing about the blink cooldown change is mobility. Blink stalkers are typically pretty safe to explore the map, even when marauders or ling/roach could also be on the field. However, it's the second blink that really gets you to safety when running from those things. If the second blink is delayed 5 seconds, I think it'll force protoss to be much more passive with stalkers. It crosses a threshold where you run a risk of the stalkers getting caught and they all die.
In my opinion, Blizzard clearly isn't just targeting the PvT blink all-ins with the blink change. But why they would want to nerf blink in general is beyond me. Stalkers kinda suck in general. They're a niche unit that becomes viable in a decent number of situations only because of blink. The problem is right now there's no risk at all to really using blink stalkers in PvT. You can virtually always escape every single time either from the Terran's base after offensive blinks, or you can do the fake blink macro builds and never lose any stalkers but still heavily pressure Terran at no risk whatsoever to yourself. Making blink require more thought to use and have more risk associated to it will go a long way to help TvP balance because right now the balance of TvP is quite abysmal. There are too, too many PvT openings that have low risks associated with them, blink probably being the one that almost always puts the Protoss player ahead, or at the very worst even which is pretty lame. With 9 range vision the MsC cannot provide adequate vision from a safe range of the positioning of all of terran forces. This means protoss players cannot blink into a terran base with full knowledge of the terran army position every time without also gaining extra info from a poke at the front for example to see what is there. If protoss does want that vision of terran base they must commit the MsC close enough that it is danger of taking damage or being killed. Why exactly is Protoss entitled to a safe blink into the Terran base? The whole idea is that there should be some risk involved in this kind of play, which is exactly why so many Terran hate (and continue to hate) the Oracle change - an aggressive, potentially high-reward play should come with some degree of risk.
I am specifically mentioning how the MsC nerf is already adding a lot more risk to the blink options vs Terran. I don't see what you are arguing?
If you cant see everything its not a free safe blink. This provides more chances for terran to abuse either the more limited vision of the mama core leading to quick poor blink decisions or for terran to damage or kill the mothership core.
Further the widow mine change means its even more effective vs one base blink all ins if the terran player has a fact coming see Twilight or a lot of stalkers and no natural.
Will it help vs blink expands? Not specifically, I mean, Protoss can still make 6 - 8 stalkers off 2 base with blink and pressure terran while taking a third, but that build doesnt get a lot of gates. If the Protoss player gets a lot of gates and doesnt commit to a big attack instead expanding with 2 gas to a third base terran should have a timing to hurt the protoss player in some way or get ahead in tech/upgrades pretty easily. The reaction from terran will require scouting and reaction to that scouting which is a metagame thing that slowly evolves and grows as the Terrans deal with it more. But thats different from balance, thats an issue of understanding from both sides. Once terran figures out the reaction Protoss will either stop doing it or retool the build to be more safe allowing terran less timing options, but more stable opportunities to expand or not lose much to the small stalker squad assuming good reactions. Thats how the game evolves
On February 12 2014 05:23 Plansix wrote:On February 12 2014 05:18 TimKim0713 wrote:
Why so low terran contributors...
Need korean opinions as well As always, teamliquid get the answers from people that respond. I am sure they would be happy to publish any pros opinion if they took the time to write it down. YES! We had a shorter deadline for this one and a few things compound the smaller number of terrans: - fewer foreign terrans than the other races in general - fewer terrans willing to provide feedback in general (we hope as these releases get more positive answers, people open up to contributing) - some Koreans who were available and willing this time provided either limited comments or ones that were a little off topic or not related to this patch noteSo I hope you can understand. If any pro Terrans want to contribute to the next one PM and I will try to include you in the next one, as long as you have a decently level head, as we try to focus on people who can consolidate their race bias and look at the game a little more objectively (pure objectivity is impossible though so we take that with a grain of salt) Are you saying that some Korean terrans did contribute but you didn't include them in the OP? Why would you do that? Even if it's off topic or ``limited'' (whatever that means), at least we understand what they're thinking about. In the end, those guys did want to give you their feedback. I think its fair to reserve some editorial judgement. And I have always believed in being very open. When I say limited, I mean the full impact of the potential change was either not expressed well. Keep in mind we do not have access to every single pro player, and Waxangel does not always have the ability to converse with the Koreans in Hangul because he does live a life. We wanted to release this quickly while it is still pertinent and to give the community some additional perspectives to digest, which is a goal I feel we achieved. There are a series of varying opinions from different races and for the most part everyone was quite objective (as much as possible) and provided different perspectives and reasoning. Jjakji chose not to make a comment. Ryung and Crank were unavailable considering our timeline. MMA provided some comments and they are included as you can see in the article. As for your concerns regarding not including information here is a very good example from Mouz Dear: "if sc2 need protoss nerf , first of all DK must do oracle roll back if it will be changed , specially blink cool down .. toss will be stupid" (via SeoHyun via Nathanias) With limited access we only have so much we can do to contact and enter into discussion to clarify things. On its own, this time we didn't get very easily understood or clear feedback. So here we see a recommendation to nerf the oracle (which is outside the scope of our article and not its aim) and we also see no mention of mothership core. We get a mention of "blink cooldown .. toss will be stupid", while the intention is there that its a bad change, it adds very little to overall article and no additional information that isn't already presented more eloquently and with more nuance than the English speaking professional players we asked. We need to remember that Koreans are not magical creatures from a far away land. They can be just as biased as any one else, and the language barrier doesn't help. We also still need people to be willing to take part and answer. I had as my aim to ask people who are generally not going to be extremely biased and I feel as though I succeeded in that regard. I see you have good intentions and overall it's an excellent initiative, but I think you've taken a wrong turn for all the right reasons. I find Dear's response excellent content. Sure, it would be nice if it were more detailed and elaborate, but the idea that these changes as a whole will not lead to a balancing of TvP and the fact that, in his mind, an oracle change will bring about balance, is something I like to know, and I assume that DK would like to know as well. As for excluding people because they are biased, once again, I don't see the responses, so I don't know exactly, but the idea is that if you have a large number of responses, especially from different races, it balances itself out. As I commented before, I do not think Desrow's comments are as unbiased as, for example, TLO's or Qxc's, but it's still valuable content to see how he thinks in his context. I'd like to see similar content from terrans, if only to counter-balance the comments from the large number of protoss players. In the end, I would not put too much emphasis on eloquence and rather get feedback from the highest level. This partly comes from my experience in diplomacy, the highest officials in the EU, WTO, UN, etc. are not very eloquent and easy to communicate with, but deciphering their comments is incredibly valuable because they are the ones performing the most important actions.
The main contribution, as I see it, of the previous pro feedback thread was that Blizzard finally started looking and Msc vision. By your estimate, when all the pro's commented on Msc range, they were ``off topic'' as it wasn't a comment on the proposed changes themselves, instead it was an alternative, and much more effective, solution that is now being considered, even if grudgingly, for a patch.
|
On February 12 2014 06:34 ZeromuS wrote:I'll add once more, the comment didnt add anything to the conversation and is outside the scope. Wanting an oracle change or different changes completely is a seperate concern for perhaps another day and another time, but really I am looking at these changes.
Talking about Swarm Hosts is to the Tempest change as talking about the Oracle is to talking about "viability of wacky Protoss openings in PvT," eg. the MSC/Blink changes. You're fine with one but not the other. Just some food for thought.
|
On February 12 2014 06:42 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2014 06:34 ZeromuS wrote:I'll add once more, the comment didnt add anything to the conversation and is outside the scope. Wanting an oracle change or different changes completely is a seperate concern for perhaps another day and another time, but really I am looking at these changes. Talking about Swarm Hosts is to the Tempest change as talking about the Oracle is to talking about "viability of wacky Protoss openings in PvT." You're fine with one but not the other. Food for thought.
food for thought: he does his best to use personal judgment in creating the best article he can, it's already been published and is being discussed, and accusing him of not handpicking the right responses (esp. when presumably only he can see them) doesn't really do anything to address the topic at hand, which i think is supposed to be starcraft. it's just forum drama
|
Canada8157 Posts
On February 12 2014 06:45 Waise wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2014 06:42 pure.Wasted wrote:On February 12 2014 06:34 ZeromuS wrote:I'll add once more, the comment didnt add anything to the conversation and is outside the scope. Wanting an oracle change or different changes completely is a seperate concern for perhaps another day and another time, but really I am looking at these changes. Talking about Swarm Hosts is to the Tempest change as talking about the Oracle is to talking about "viability of wacky Protoss openings in PvT." You're fine with one but not the other. Food for thought. food for thought: he does his best to use personal judgment in creating the best article he can, it's already been published and is being discussed, and accusing him of not handpicking the right responses (esp. when presumably only he can see them) doesn't really do anything to address the topic at hand, which i think is supposed to be starcraft. it's just forum drama
He spent an insane amount of time on this contacting the right people to get all of these responses to get this out as fast as possible, and we can only get so many pro's opinions on this
|
On February 12 2014 06:45 Waise wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2014 06:42 pure.Wasted wrote:On February 12 2014 06:34 ZeromuS wrote:I'll add once more, the comment didnt add anything to the conversation and is outside the scope. Wanting an oracle change or different changes completely is a seperate concern for perhaps another day and another time, but really I am looking at these changes. Talking about Swarm Hosts is to the Tempest change as talking about the Oracle is to talking about "viability of wacky Protoss openings in PvT." You're fine with one but not the other. Food for thought. food for thought: he does his best to use personal judgment in creating the best article he can, it's already been published and is being discussed, and accusing him of not handpicking the right responses (esp. when presumably only he can see them) doesn't really do anything to address the topic at hand, which i think is supposed to be starcraft. it's just forum drama
Whoa, whoa, hold your horses. I'm not accusing anyone of anything. I already said in my earlier post on the subject that I have the utmost respect for what these guys are doing. I'm just giving another perspective on a decision they made, which they're welcome to do with as they please when they compile the next such batch, of which I hope there will be many more to come!
To my mind, what Dear said isn't so off-topic that it has no place in a discussion about changes to PvT early game. I'm not even clear on whether Dear was one of the pros contacted for this compilation, or if he voiced his opinions separately and ZeromuS is simply pointing out that "this is the kind of response we sometimes get," I'm just saying that a response of that sort seems relevant to me. That's all!
|
Canada13389 Posts
On February 12 2014 06:42 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2014 06:34 ZeromuS wrote:I'll add once more, the comment didnt add anything to the conversation and is outside the scope. Wanting an oracle change or different changes completely is a seperate concern for perhaps another day and another time, but really I am looking at these changes. Talking about Swarm Hosts is to the Tempest change as talking about the Oracle is to talking about "viability of wacky Protoss openings in PvT." You're fine with one but not the other. Food for thought.
My perspective is that all the recommendations made here and in the previous article (regarding MsC vision radius) were made within the context of considering the proposed changes and offering alternatives.
Dear's comment was one which disregarded the other changes (basically writing them off) and recommending a change that had no consensus from anyone else at all.
Looking at the Swarmhost comments they are in direct response to the proposed reasoning behind the Tempest change: to make Swarmhost turtle less effective behind Static Defense in the PvZ matchup. Many people say the proposed change is not addressing the main issue but can still be good/bad/no impact. Similar to how the time warp change was seen as good but not necessarily enough and also missing the point.
So for me, to be clear, I felt that Dear's comment was very different in terms of an "out of scope comment" compared to the other "out of scope" comments made regarding the swarm host. One has no relation to the existing positions of Blizzard regarding their proposed changes while ignoring the changes overall that are proposed (Dear's comment) while the other group look at the reasoning behind the proposed changes and express how a different change (to the core concern) would likely be more effective.
The core concern this article was the swarmhost, and a proposed change intends to impact it. The core concern previously of blink all ins and the mothership core power was addressed through a timewarp nerf but the core concern was the mothership core and vision range is more impactful.
The core concern here is not "protoss overpowered" rather "blink all ins PvT are perhaps too strong" with regards to protoss strength. I feel that and Oracle comment is best suited to address concerns of the power of the Protoss race overall and not related to the core concerns expressed by Blizz which is why I felt it wasn't necessarily related. Furthermore, the fact that oracles are falling more and more out of favour and doing less and less damage at a high level of play also shows some adaptation to the builds through openings and scouting patterns so I didnt include it this time.
But I take the criticism with thought and will consider this point of view in the future releases, however, don't believe I will be revising the existing article to include it.
I hope thats cool with you guys :D
If you would like to continue discussing this I would be more than happy to take it to PMs so we don't bog down the thread with any drama and it can get back on topic. 
|
Well I think they want to test the increased Blink duration and just overdo it to see the outcome. But if they weaken Blink we might end up getting stronger Stalkers!
|
Here is an innocent thought. What about making the MSC a ground unit and leave blink as it is?
|
On February 12 2014 06:39 ROOTiaguz wrote:
As long as Protoss can blink stalkers up cliffs they're gonna do blink stalker builds, I suspect. And as long as they can potentially do them they can also keep doing the obnoxious blink-all-in-but-not-really-because-you-scouted-it-I'll-just-make-2-forges-and-get-storm-have-fun-behind-ur-bunkers-hahahahahahah style of play. I wouldn't mind an artificial solution to this style of play, like a kind of cliff that couldn't be blinked up.
This obviously won't happen and I foresee the loss of many, many ladder points (and the brain cells required for sanity) to the blinky little fucks.
Widow mine change is incredible though. Like that one!
Yes, thank you! I don't get all the whining about blink.... implying it's going to suddenly be out of the game..
The last time I checked nearly every map in the pool currently favors blink. It's like we want to give Protoss every possible chance to survive, force field, mass recall, hallucinated scouting, time warp, but god for-fucking-bid we increase the cool down on Blink, oh god no.
|
On February 12 2014 07:02 Ctone23 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2014 06:39 ROOTiaguz wrote:
As long as Protoss can blink stalkers up cliffs they're gonna do blink stalker builds, I suspect. And as long as they can potentially do them they can also keep doing the obnoxious blink-all-in-but-not-really-because-you-scouted-it-I'll-just-make-2-forges-and-get-storm-have-fun-behind-ur-bunkers-hahahahahahah style of play. I wouldn't mind an artificial solution to this style of play, like a kind of cliff that couldn't be blinked up.
This obviously won't happen and I foresee the loss of many, many ladder points (and the brain cells required for sanity) to the blinky little fucks.
Widow mine change is incredible though. Like that one! Yes, thank you! I don't get all the whining about blink.... implying it's going to suddenly be out of the game.. The last time I checked nearly every map in the pool currently favors blink. It's like we want to give Protoss every possible chance to survive, force field, mass recall, hallucinated scouting, time warp, but god for-fucking-bid we increase the cool down on Blink, oh god no.
It's a fun ability, and one of the few ways in the game for a Protoss with excellent mechanical skill to really distinguish himself. Is that really what you want to cut down, when there are so many other options still on the table? Blink height nerf and Time Warp nerf immediately come to mind as superior options.
|
I especially like how desrow is against every change that comes as even a slight Toss nerf.
It's probably the reason why David Kim resorts to statistics when it comes to balance. It's impossible to get unbiased views even from 'pros'.
|
When was the last time a very core unit was changed? Messing with the core units (zealot, stalker, zergling, roach, marine, marauder) seems like a bad, or risky idea, because it messes with the balance in a bigger
way than if one was to just adjust later game stage or more niche units."
XMG Socke
and
Mousesports HasuObs
It was only 3 months ago, guys, forget already?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
