|
On May 01 2014 05:16 Zenbrez wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:15 Faust852 wrote:On May 01 2014 05:02 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 04:59 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 04:53 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote:
I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong.
I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno.
Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?). Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it. If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games. It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage. Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate. You know the month before the nerf, there was exactly 50% winrate in TvZ ? Yes, read my above post. That's because all terrans were doing was 3CC 2ebay. If zergs did roach bane all in, they won. If they tried to macro, they lost most of the time. It's like nobody remembers what they watched a year ago. It was agonizing because tvz had become a slaughter one way or the other (mine power or roach allin)
I remember a DRG that was in a huge slump beating Innovation (at the time by far the best player in the world) in one of the sickest bo3 of the year.
If you ask, I can provide you a shit tons of awesome game prepatch. Much more than now.
|
On May 01 2014 05:13 Zenbrez wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:05 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 05:02 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 04:59 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 04:53 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote:
I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong.
I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno.
Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?). Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it. If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games. It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage. Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate. So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you. Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever. What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games. I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game. I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation. Show nested quote +and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight. If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors.
Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game.
|
The reason it was "balanced" was because half the time Terran played extremely greedily and got away with it,and with Widow mines it was very hard for the Zerg to stop the parade push. The other half of the time, the Zerg wisened up and Roach/Bane busted the greedy Terran who had nothing to defend with.
Terran has ALL the tools to scout these Roach/bane busts. 3CC first, ask questions later is really the only reason they lose to them.
|
Why are people acting like ZvT is in a cataclysmic state because Zerg has like a 54-57% winrate now? I belive there was a time that lasted several months where Terrans were winning about 60-65% of TvZs
|
On May 01 2014 05:29 DinoMight wrote:
The reason it was "balanced" was because half the time Terran played extremely greedily and got away with it,and with Widow mines it was very hard for the Zerg to stop the parade push. The other half of the time, the Zerg wisened up and Roach/Bane busted the greedy Terran who had nothing to defend with.
Terran has ALL the tools to scout these Roach/bane busts. 3CC first, ask questions later is really the only reason they lose to them.
Please, wonder why all the pro still play 3cc fast 2ebay even now then. Builds didn't change at all. Because they are the only viable.
Your argument is really poor.
|
49.99% and below for 1 month and everyone on this forum flips shit.
|
On May 01 2014 05:29 DinoMight wrote:
The reason it was "balanced" was because half the time Terran played extremely greedily and got away with it,and with Widow mines it was very hard for the Zerg to stop the parade push. The other half of the time, the Zerg wisened up and Roach/Bane busted the greedy Terran who had nothing to defend with.
Terran has ALL the tools to scout these Roach/bane busts. 3CC first, ask questions later is really the only reason they lose to them.
Terrans don't play perfectly. I think that's reason enough for them to lose everything.
|
On May 01 2014 05:30 Varroth wrote:
Why are people acting like ZvT is in a cataclysmic state because Zerg has like a 54-57% winrate now? I belive there was a time that lasted several months where Terrans were winning about 60-65% of TvZs
Only pre-hellbat nerf, at the begining of HotS. Since then, it was super even. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/
|
On May 01 2014 05:30 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:29 DinoMight wrote:
The reason it was "balanced" was because half the time Terran played extremely greedily and got away with it,and with Widow mines it was very hard for the Zerg to stop the parade push. The other half of the time, the Zerg wisened up and Roach/Bane busted the greedy Terran who had nothing to defend with.
Terran has ALL the tools to scout these Roach/bane busts. 3CC first, ask questions later is really the only reason they lose to them. Please, wonder why all the pro still play 3cc fast 2ebay even now then. Builds didn't change at all. Because they are the only viable. Your argument is really poor.
People talk about "the only viable build" all the time. Go back and look at what people were posting about last year as "the only viable build."
You see a lot of guys getting fast banshee and things like that to delay the Zerg's 3rd. Fast 3 CC is a style that is very weak to certain things (like Roach bust).
|
On May 01 2014 05:22 DomeGetta wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:13 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 05:05 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 05:02 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 04:59 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 04:53 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote:
I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong.
I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno.
Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?). Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it. If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games. It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage. Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate. So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you. Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever. What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games. I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game. I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation. and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight. If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors. Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game.
Dude no offense, but you are in masters, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves a high level of micro.
Things IMO that need to be looked into
-phoenix slightly too strong vs almost everything?
-zerg 3-3 needs to be unlocked with infestation pit or make 3-3 fusion core, and fleet beacon( will never happen)
-mines damage reverted back, no longer autofire, must be manually selected.
-swarmhosts reworked somehow, boring unskilled unit like the mine
-ravens probably the most broken unit in the game right now, perfect raven play should NEVER lose to Z.
|
On May 01 2014 05:33 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:30 Faust852 wrote:On May 01 2014 05:29 DinoMight wrote:
The reason it was "balanced" was because half the time Terran played extremely greedily and got away with it,and with Widow mines it was very hard for the Zerg to stop the parade push. The other half of the time, the Zerg wisened up and Roach/Bane busted the greedy Terran who had nothing to defend with.
Terran has ALL the tools to scout these Roach/bane busts. 3CC first, ask questions later is really the only reason they lose to them. Please, wonder why all the pro still play 3cc fast 2ebay even now then. Builds didn't change at all. Because they are the only viable. Your argument is really poor. People talk about "the only viable build" all the time. Go back and look at what people were posting about last year as "the only viable build." You see a lot of guys getting fast banshee and things like that to delay the Zerg's 3rd. Fast 3 CC is a style that is very weak to certain things (like Roach bust).
Innovation build is by far the more popular, with 2 reapers, 6 hellions, fast 3rd, then either 2 raxs or 2 ebays. That's the ultimate build right now, probably used in 80% of TvZ games. This build is around since like 1 year.
|
On May 01 2014 05:29 DinoMight wrote:
The reason it was "balanced" was because half the time Terran played extremely greedily and got away with it,and with Widow mines it was very hard for the Zerg to stop the parade push. The other half of the time, the Zerg wisened up and Roach/Bane busted the greedy Terran who had nothing to defend with.
Terran has ALL the tools to scout these Roach/bane busts. 3CC first, ask questions later is really the only reason they lose to them.
Why do people always have to rewrite history with those dumb "50% of the time Zergs all-inned with Roaches and won, 50% of the time Terrans won macro game with parade push". This is WRONG. The builds played back then were the same as the current ones and nothing changed regarding triple OC vs Roaches/Banelings busts scenarii (except Mines are a bit weaker for defence). Just because there was a brief surge of Roaches/Banelings busts at some time doesn't mean it was the only way Zergs won.
|
On May 01 2014 05:33 duckk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:22 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 05:13 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 05:05 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 05:02 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 04:59 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 04:53 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote:
I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong.
I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno.
Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?). Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it. If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games. It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage. Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate. So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you. Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever. What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games. I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game. I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation. and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight. If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors. Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game. Dude no offense, but you are in masters, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves a high level of micro. Things IMO that need to be looked into -phoenix slightly too strong vs almost everything? -zerg 3-3 needs to be unlocked with infestation pit or make 3-3 fusion core, and fleet beacon( will never happen) -mines damage reverted back, no longer autofire, must be manually selected. -swarmhosts reworked somehow, boring unskilled unit like the mine -ravens probably the most broken unit in the game right now, perfect raven play should NEVER lose to Z.
Dude no offense, you're not pro, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves balancing things.
See ?
Zerg 2/2 deal with terran 3/3 without any problem, and you want to put 3/3 on fusion core?
How do you want mine to be manually activated ? By pressing on button ? Or by target firing ? The later is impossible even at the highest level of play.
I remember Happy losing a macrogame vs Z with sth like 20 ravens. But meh, not like Happy has one of the best micro in the world, Koreans included.
|
On May 01 2014 05:33 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:30 Faust852 wrote:On May 01 2014 05:29 DinoMight wrote:
The reason it was "balanced" was because half the time Terran played extremely greedily and got away with it,and with Widow mines it was very hard for the Zerg to stop the parade push. The other half of the time, the Zerg wisened up and Roach/Bane busted the greedy Terran who had nothing to defend with.
Terran has ALL the tools to scout these Roach/bane busts. 3CC first, ask questions later is really the only reason they lose to them. Please, wonder why all the pro still play 3cc fast 2ebay even now then. Builds didn't change at all. Because they are the only viable. Your argument is really poor. People talk about "the only viable build" all the time. Go back and look at what people were posting about last year as "the only viable build." You see a lot of guys getting fast banshee and things like that to delay the Zerg's 3rd. Fast 3 CC is a style that is very weak to certain things (like Roach bust).
LOL at this point it seems like you are trolling.
The root of your argument is "ez - Terran just shouldn't play macro-games - u have to attack the zerg and see what happens hopefully he doesn't defend well and you win" The whole problem with what your saying is that you don't have to "commit" to a big roach bust - you can build a roach warren and then macro up if it gets scouted - an overlord into the main sees a banshee coming and it is totally useless - honestly I'm trying to be as open minded as possible if you can please point me in the direction of some vods that show good Korean T's beating down other good Korean Z's in the last few weeks I will definitely take a look for myself - at this point though fixing the mine needs to happen imo - we already have data that shows the matchup being balanced with it - and contrary to your statements a bunch of macrogame examples to go off.
|
On May 01 2014 05:31 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:30 Varroth wrote:
Why are people acting like ZvT is in a cataclysmic state because Zerg has like a 54-57% winrate now? I belive there was a time that lasted several months where Terrans were winning about 60-65% of TvZs Only pre-hellbat nerf, at the begining of HotS. Since then, it was super even. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/
Don't think hellbats had anything to do with TvZ of 55% in May. Rather, terran win/rates in competitive play simply had to go up as too many zergs who had entered the level required to play competively in the end of the WOL era, didn't actually had the required skill-set to play at that level in a "balanced" game. So to say it in another way: Superior terrans were being matched up against patch-zergs, and thus naturally won more than 50% of the time
When that is said, there is also some truth to zergs needing time to learn to play against Widow Mines, but Hellbats weren't actually that dominant in TvZ.
One easy way to see that terran never in any phase during HOTS was actually overpowered (statistically) is to look at representation. If you go back in time and look at the numbers during phases of the game where it was obvious that one race was too strong you notice the following patterns;
Early WOL --> There was a terran represented in around 70% of non-mirror matches in competitive play
Late WOL --> Zerg had 70%+ race distribution in nonmirrormatches in competitive play
Last 6 months of HOTS --> Toss had 70%+ race distribution
Terran, however, was at around 60% during its height in HOTS. If anything, terran was still statistically underpowered, however one could ofc point to the fact that top top-terrans (such as Innovation) were during well, but that only supports the argument of not buffing terran further.
Actually, nerfing terran in a matchup that worked pretty well is one of the biggest mistakes Blizzard ever made.
|
On May 01 2014 05:43 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:31 Faust852 wrote:On May 01 2014 05:30 Varroth wrote:
Why are people acting like ZvT is in a cataclysmic state because Zerg has like a 54-57% winrate now? I belive there was a time that lasted several months where Terrans were winning about 60-65% of TvZs Only pre-hellbat nerf, at the begining of HotS. Since then, it was super even. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ Don't think hellbats had anything to do with TvZ of 55% in May. Rather, terran win/rates in competitive play simply had to go up as too many zergs who had entered the level required to play competively in the end of the WOL era, didn't actually had the required skill-set to play at that level in a "balanced" game. So to say it in another way: Superior terrans were being matched up against patch-zergs, and thus naturally won more than 50% of the time When that is said, there is also some truth to zergs needing time to learn to play against Widow Mines, but Hellbats weren't actually that dominant in TvZ.
Drophellbat not dominant ? Lol. Every game we saw dropHB in everyMU.
|
On May 01 2014 05:33 duckk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:22 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 05:13 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 05:05 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 05:02 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 04:59 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 04:53 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote:
I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong.
I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno.
Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?). Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it. If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games. It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage. Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate. So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you. Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever. What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games. I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game. I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation. and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight. If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors. Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game. Dude no offense, but you are in masters, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves a high level of micro. Things IMO that need to be looked into -phoenix slightly too strong vs almost everything? -zerg 3-3 needs to be unlocked with infestation pit or make 3-3 fusion core, and fleet beacon( will never happen) -mines damage reverted back, no longer autofire, must be manually selected. -swarmhosts reworked somehow, boring unskilled unit like the mine -ravens probably the most broken unit in the game right now, perfect raven play should NEVER lose to Z.
And it's posts like these that make me hate myself for even bothering to post here lol.
|
On May 01 2014 05:44 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:43 Hider wrote:On May 01 2014 05:31 Faust852 wrote:On May 01 2014 05:30 Varroth wrote:
Why are people acting like ZvT is in a cataclysmic state because Zerg has like a 54-57% winrate now? I belive there was a time that lasted several months where Terrans were winning about 60-65% of TvZs Only pre-hellbat nerf, at the begining of HotS. Since then, it was super even. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ Don't think hellbats had anything to do with TvZ of 55% in May. Rather, terran win/rates in competitive play simply had to go up as too many zergs who had entered the level required to play competively in the end of the WOL era, didn't actually had the required skill-set to play at that level in a "balanced" game. So to say it in another way: Superior terrans were being matched up against patch-zergs, and thus naturally won more than 50% of the time When that is said, there is also some truth to zergs needing time to learn to play against Widow Mines, but Hellbats weren't actually that dominant in TvZ. Drophellbat not dominant ? Lol. Every game we saw dropHB in everyMU.
No only TvT. It was just one TvZ option terrans had back then, but it wasn't the standard opening. Your clearly rewriting history.
|
On May 01 2014 05:39 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:33 duckk wrote:On May 01 2014 05:22 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 05:13 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 05:05 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 05:02 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 04:59 DomeGetta wrote:On May 01 2014 04:53 Zenbrez wrote:On May 01 2014 03:25 Nimix wrote:
I hate how they keep adding changes without considering reverting the changes they made before. The aoe damage change on the widow mine was a mistake imo, it's part of what allows zerg to take advantage of the early fights and snowball from there. Old widow mines allowed for terran comebacks the way banelings do (if zerg a moved his stuff on a mine field, he would lose a ton of shit, while now it's kind of acceptable). The new ones kind of suck in TvZ (sure you can still kill tons of stuff with them if you get super lucky against a super careless opponent, but still), and the TvP buff looks too strong.
I don't think the upgrade cost will change anything in the matchup, it's kind of nice but you would still get them around the same time anyway, even if you need to cut medivac production for a few seconds. The hellbat change could lead into some pretty powerful BF hellion into bio hellbats openings I guess, dunno.
Still, when they consider balance I think they should look at what they did before and consider this before changing anything else (oracle speed anyone?). Old mines were straight up too good. Considering good zergs micro their banes in x direction, and even the best terrans don't micro their widowmines in regular fights, it's not the same thing. They might target their widowmines if they're in a mineral line or are near a zealot/sentry ball, but that's almost the extent of that.
Just give siegetanks blink and autorepair and be done with it.
This man gets it. If old mines were "straight up too good" explain how players like Dimaga were able to beat Flash - Scarlett to beat MVP and DRG to dominate Innovation in a bo3 in code S in "straight up" macro games. It's really easy to make a blanket statement like that without backing it up with any actual supporting information. This is the reason they got nerfed to begin with. If your micro is good - you can disarm them and limit the damage they do (see any of these games above for examples) - if your micro is not - you will lose e.g. every single foreign T trying to play vs Korean Zergs at a micro skill disadvantage. Because being "too good" doesn't mean zvt has a 0% winrate. So then define "too good" and if you have a valid point I will agree with you. Otherwise it's not value added whatsoever. What the old mines definitely did do was prevent the kind of thing you are seeing at present with mutalisks and the ability to a move chase down armies off creep which is what snowballs into the roflstompings that you see in some of these games. I get the impression people saying the nerf should be reverted think it because they forget what the time was like. TvZ was almost 50% winrate, but only because zergs were roach bane all inning like 2 out of every 3 games. Terrans all went fast 3CC 2 ebay. They would win if the zerg didn't allin, and lose otherwise. Do you think Theognis beat JD in a bo3 because he was that good? Or because JD sucked? A single untargeted mine hit would kill upwards of 20 lings/banes, and this happened all throughout the game. Hellbats were present at this time and did contribute to the tvz slaughterfest, but they were nerfed before the mines, and this gave people like Soulkey the ability to properly compete. But still overall, zergs would die nearly every macro game. I could look up tournament histories and stats to back up my claims, but I don't feel like it's worth the work to convince one or a few people. Saying that removes credibility my arguments, but you haven't provided any stats for your claims either so I don't feel too badly. Anyways carry on, I don't think we're going to go anywhere with this conversation. and PS please do not make the case that pre-splitting ur banes before u a move constitutes sick micro - T has had to presplit their army 100% of the time since the game came out, it's the least micro intensive thing about the fight. If that's in response to me saying zergs micro their banes, that's not what I meant. They generally control-click their banes and move-command them past the terran army, and do to a few small segments so they go in different directions. The purpose is so they don't just walk into mauraders/thors. Zerg had 50% winrate but it was mostly because of roach bane all ins? So let me get this straight.. Z was winning half the games because they have really strong all ins.. the other half were being won because widow mines were "straight up too good"..hm... so not that I agree with either of those statements at all, but if that really was the case.. why were only widow mines nerfed to uselessness and nothing happened to help T with the roach timings? I don't know about you but at mid to high masters NA I lose to both..plenty of roach all ins and plenty of macrogames where I can't keep up with the ling/bane cost efficiency vs my nerfed mines. I would be OK with a partial reverting of the widow mine nerf even if they didn't give it all of it's damage back say half if they did a substantial nerf to the mass roach / roach bane timings because at least then my economy could keep up into the mid game. Dude no offense, but you are in masters, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves a high level of micro. Things IMO that need to be looked into -phoenix slightly too strong vs almost everything? -zerg 3-3 needs to be unlocked with infestation pit or make 3-3 fusion core, and fleet beacon( will never happen) -mines damage reverted back, no longer autofire, must be manually selected. -swarmhosts reworked somehow, boring unskilled unit like the mine -ravens probably the most broken unit in the game right now, perfect raven play should NEVER lose to Z. Dude no offense, you're not pro, you should not be commenting on a balance issue that involves balancing things. See ? Zerg 2/2 deal with terran 3/3 without any problem, and you want to put 3/3 on fusion core? How do you want mine to be manually activated ? By pressing on button ? Or by target firing ? The later is impossible even at the highest level of play. I remember Happy losing a macrogame vs Z with sth like 20 ravens. But meh, not like Happy has one of the best micro in the world, Koreans included.
Maybe I am not pro, but I have beaten almost every code s Korean on ladder numerous times, granted ladder means little. I've played against happy for years ( since wc3) and while his micro is arguably one of the best in the world, he lacks in other areas. Ravens do not get better with micro... they are more about map awareness and strategy. Perhaps with the widow mine, keep the current damage, but if manually selected it does the old mine damage. Reward the terrans for controlling them rather than having them as slot machines. Also, 2-2 zerg does not deal with 3-3 terran cost effectively.
|
On May 01 2014 05:47 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:44 Faust852 wrote:On May 01 2014 05:43 Hider wrote:On May 01 2014 05:31 Faust852 wrote:On May 01 2014 05:30 Varroth wrote:
Why are people acting like ZvT is in a cataclysmic state because Zerg has like a 54-57% winrate now? I belive there was a time that lasted several months where Terrans were winning about 60-65% of TvZs Only pre-hellbat nerf, at the begining of HotS. Since then, it was super even. http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/ Don't think hellbats had anything to do with TvZ of 55% in May. Rather, terran win/rates in competitive play simply had to go up as too many zergs who had entered the level required to play competively in the end of the WOL era, didn't actually had the required skill-set to play at that level in a "balanced" game. So to say it in another way: Superior terrans were being matched up against patch-zergs, and thus naturally won more than 50% of the time When that is said, there is also some truth to zergs needing time to learn to play against Widow Mines, but Hellbats weren't actually that dominant in TvZ. Drophellbat not dominant ? Lol. Every game we saw dropHB in everyMU. No only TvT. It was just one TvZ option terrans had back then, but it wasn't the standard opening. Your clearly rewriting history.
I rewrite nothing. DropHellbat was clearly a very used build. I recall Mvp doing it everytime. I don't say RealT vs PatchZ is wrong, I think it is too, but denying Hellbat drop was a thing is wrong. Remember the MLG Life won ? In April I think. So many hellbat drop this month.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
