|
On May 01 2014 05:50 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:47 Hider wrote: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.
I don't remember any Hellbat drop at the MLG. I think they came a bit later, perhaps May in Europe and in the summer in Korea from memory (unsure).
|
On May 01 2014 05:48 duckk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:39 Faust852 wrote: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.
As I said, manually selected how ? You put them in a control group and press X so they explode close unit ? Or you need to focus fire with them ? If the later, I say it again, but it is impossible, and it would make the unit even worst.
If so 2/2 does not deal with 3/3 T, explain why the current patch ? Why Terran are losing so much right now ? They always have 3/3 before 2/2, and usually lose before the Z reachs 3/3.
|
On May 01 2014 05:53 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:50 Faust852 wrote:On May 01 2014 05:47 Hider wrote: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. I don't remember any Hellbat drop at the MLG. I think they came a bit later, perhaps May in Europe and in the summer in Korea from memory (unsure).
You may be right, it's been a year, I don't remember everygame after such a long time tho.
|
On May 01 2014 05:50 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:47 Hider wrote: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.
I actually think its comparable to Banshee openings in TvZ today. If you open mech, going banshee with lots of hellions is kinda standard. The same thing was the case for mech back then, and MVP was obviously more of a mech player. However, very few actually mech'ed in early HOTS and just normal hellion into double ebay + 3rd CC was the common build.
So using MVP as the example of a typical terran player to demonstrate your point is very misleading.
Innovations style is much closer to that of the typicaly pro terran player. In the final against Soulkey, he also only Hellbat dropped once as I remember it.
|
On May 01 2014 05:54 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:50 Faust852 wrote:On May 01 2014 05:47 Hider wrote: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. I actually think its comparable to Banshee openings in TvZ now o days. If you open mech, going banshee with lots of hellions is kinda standard. The same thing was the case for mech back then, and MVP was obviously more of a mech player. However, very few actually mech'ed in early HOTS and just normal hellion into double ebay + 3rd CC was the common build. So using MVP as the example of a typical terran player, is a really poor argument. Innovations style is much closer to that of the typicaly pro terran player. In the final against Soulkey, he also only Hellbat dropped once as I remember it.
Twice, on Bel'shir and Daybreak.
|
On May 01 2014 05:48 duckk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:39 Faust852 wrote: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 !@#$%^&*, 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.
Better solution is to make Widow Mine timer not reset when you manually target them IMO.
|
On May 01 2014 05:55 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:54 Hider wrote:On May 01 2014 05:50 Faust852 wrote:On May 01 2014 05:47 Hider wrote: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. I actually think its comparable to Banshee openings in TvZ now o days. If you open mech, going banshee with lots of hellions is kinda standard. The same thing was the case for mech back then, and MVP was obviously more of a mech player. However, very few actually mech'ed in early HOTS and just normal hellion into double ebay + 3rd CC was the common build. So using MVP as the example of a typical terran player, is a really poor argument. Innovations style is much closer to that of the typicaly pro terran player. In the final against Soulkey, he also only Hellbat dropped once as I remember it. Twice, on Bel'shir and Daybreak.
Oh, only remembered the Belshir game.
|
On April 30 2014 12:26 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2014 12:06 WiggyB wrote:On April 30 2014 11:38 LongShot27 wrote:On April 30 2014 11:36 WiggyB wrote:On April 30 2014 11:30 ProBell wrote:
Make widow mines or siege tank splash damage not attack friendly units or do less damage to friendlies?
Banelings / Colossus / Archons / Fungals / Ultralisk all don't have friendly-fire. Actually, that's a not a bad idea. Why does Terran splash have friendly fire anyway? When artillery or a mine explodes, it doesn't discriminate based on who's it is Yeah, but why? Colossus mega death beams don't cause friendly fire, baneling explosions don't hurt any other banelings or zerglings. Huge swiping ultralisks arms don't hurt anyone else. Though, i can see if widow mine friendly fire was taken away it would be really, really hard for a zerg to engage a burrowed widow mine / bio force. But maybe siege tanks? I know it's lore breaking, but it multi player balance we're talking here. Because it's actual balance and dynamics that makes the play interesting. Storm also does friendly fire, woudl you like to see that changed?
I'm speaking off topic here, but its kind of funny how archons, "pure beings of psionic energy" dont splash their own units but their separated counterparts do splash with storm.. presumably using the same type of energy as when they are fused or whatever..
On topic: hellbat attacks are hell for an unprepared zerg, but i do think T needs some help in that matchup (both matchups really) ZvP seems pretty fine but the swarmhosts don't seem very fun in ZvZ. maybe take away that spore buff to make mutas viable, or scale it back down a bit?
|
On May 01 2014 05:53 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:48 duckk wrote:On May 01 2014 05:39 Faust852 wrote: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:
[quote]
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.[quote]
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. As I said, manually selected how ? You put them in a control group and press X so they explode close unit ? Or you need to focus fire with them ? If the later, I say it again, but it is impossible, and it would make the unit even worst. If so 2/2 does not deal with 3/3 T, explain why the current patch ? Why Terran are losing so much right now ? They always have 3/3 before 2/2, and usually lose before the Z reachs 3/3.
focus fire, and its not impossible just difficult, but the old mines were too strong. There is no argument about that. If the terran chooses not to micro them then they autofire and do their current underwhelming damage. I guess best option is to buff the damage/aoe somewhat inbetween what it was and is now.
I've only been playing CG"s, and the terran I play with only has been doing mech, but I assume zergs are winning because of the maps. They seem like zerg is able to either be overly greedy and get away with it or do some random attack that kills workers and still make drones while being able to defend a counter attack. At that point zergs econ is too far ahead for 3-3 to matter.
|
On May 01 2014 05:56 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:48 duckk wrote:On May 01 2014 05:39 Faust852 wrote: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:
[quote]
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.[quote]
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. Better solution is to make Widow Mine timer not reset when you manually target them IMO. That would be SO broken in early game/small numbers of units scenarios. Or massed widow mines. 125 damage from a cloaked 75/25 unit every 5 seconds? Sign me up, please.
|
Anyway, at the time that the Hellbat patch was implemented, win/rates had already gone down from 55% of May to 52.5% in June and 51% in July.
|
On May 01 2014 06:00 duckk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:53 Faust852 wrote:On May 01 2014 05:48 duckk wrote:On May 01 2014 05:39 Faust852 wrote: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:
[quote]
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. As I said, manually selected how ? You put them in a control group and press X so they explode close unit ? Or you need to focus fire with them ? If the later, I say it again, but it is impossible, and it would make the unit even worst. If so 2/2 does not deal with 3/3 T, explain why the current patch ? Why Terran are losing so much right now ? They always have 3/3 before 2/2, and usually lose before the Z reachs 3/3. focus fire, and its not impossible just difficult, but the old mines were too strong. There is no argument about that. If the terran chooses not to micro them then they autofire and do their current underwhelming damage. I guess best option is to buff the damage/aoe somewhat inbetween what it was and is now. I've only been playing CG"s, and the terran I play with only has been doing mech, but I assume zergs are winning because of the maps. They seem like zerg is able to either be overly greedy and get away with it or do some random attack that kills workers and still make drones while being able to defend a counter attack. At that point zergs econ is too far ahead for 3-3 to matter.
1) I Agree map are shit for terrans nowadays.
About the focus firing with mines, imagine how hard if will in big engagement. Pro players never focus fire in big engagement because saving the bio is more important. How can you with llike 15 mines, clic on each of them, focus a unit, then switch to another mines etc, while splitting your entire army ? It's nearly impossible. Really good players do focus with mine, but when it's a little fight, they have a couple of mines and some clumped bane for the opponent, that's all.
|
IMO they should just leave the game for a few months and see what happens, maybe change maps in the middle. The patches are so fast that the meta has no time to mature at all. Don't they remember sc1? Freaking everything was OP in there lol.
|
On May 01 2014 06:04 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:56 Hider wrote:On May 01 2014 05:48 duckk wrote:On May 01 2014 05:39 Faust852 wrote: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:
[quote]
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. Better solution is to make Widow Mine timer not reset when you manually target them IMO. That would be SO broken in early game/small numbers of units scenarios. Or massed widow mines. 125 damage from a cloaked 75/25 unit every 5 seconds? Sign me up, please.
I am not talking about the 40second cooldown, but the 1.5 second timer that is being reset when you manualy focus fire it. IMO that makes it unpractical to focus fire with it in a lot of sitautions.
|
On May 01 2014 06:04 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:56 Hider wrote:On May 01 2014 05:48 duckk wrote:On May 01 2014 05:39 Faust852 wrote: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:
[quote]
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. Better solution is to make Widow Mine timer not reset when you manually target them IMO. That would be SO broken in early game/small numbers of units scenarios. Or massed widow mines. 125 damage from a cloaked 75/25 unit every 5 seconds? Sign me up, please.
He's talking about the 1,5 second delay between locking a target and firing a missile.
|
nvm 
|
On May 01 2014 06:04 RampancyTW wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 05:56 Hider wrote:On May 01 2014 05:48 duckk wrote:On May 01 2014 05:39 Faust852 wrote: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:
[quote]
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. Better solution is to make Widow Mine timer not reset when you manually target them IMO. That would be SO broken in early game/small numbers of units scenarios. Or massed widow mines. 125 damage from a cloaked 75/25 unit every 5 seconds? Sign me up, please.
I think he wanted to say, that when you focus a unit manually with a mine, it resets the timer currently. Not the timer after the mine hit, but the delay right before it explodes.
|
As said before by some smart people : win ratio means NOTHING.
Since the players who don't win as often stop to get qualified or invited to tournaments, win ratio naturally equals out with time. You have to consider the players distribution.
A 50% win ratio when the 5 best T are competing against the 15 best Z and 15 best P is not an indicator of balance.
What in reality happens is that the top 3 T can't really touch the top 3 Z/P, but can compete with the top 10 Z/P, and can easily beat the bottom top 15, which makes the win ratio somewhat 50%ish and gives the illusion of balance.
It is in fact, the definition itself of imbalance : you have to be significantly better than your opponent to win reliably, if you're equal to your opponent in terms of skill, you will lose most of the times.
|
On May 01 2014 06:10 SiroKO wrote:
As said before by some smart people : win ratio means NOTHING.
Since the players who don't win as often stop to get qualified or invited to tournaments, win ratio naturally equals out with time. You have to consider the players distribution.
A 50% win ratio when the 5 best T are competing against the 15 best Z and 15 best P is not an indicator of balance.
What in reality happens is that the top 3 T can't really touch the top 3 Z/P, but can compete with the top 10 Z/P, and can easily beat the bottom top 15, which makes the win ratio somewhat 50%ish and gives the illusion of balance.
It is in fact, the definition itself of imbalance : you have to be significantly better than your opponent to win reliably, if you're equal to your opponent in terms of skill, you will lose most of the times.
We can use this argument too. Check how few terrans there is. Maybe 1/5 of the racial distribution in pro games.
|
I've said that countless times, some people just don't (want to) understand how statistics like these work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
