|
On July 10 2014 00:10 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2014 00:01 TheDwf wrote:On July 09 2014 23:33 Big J wrote:On July 09 2014 23:21 TheDwf wrote:On July 09 2014 22:59 Tsubbi wrote:On July 09 2014 21:08 TheDwf wrote:On July 09 2014 20:49 SatedSC2 wrote:On July 09 2014 18:40 Glorfindel! wrote:On July 09 2014 18:28 Hider wrote:
Personally I think that for mine and thor they tweaking the wrong thing. Mine is only going to cause terran to be even stronger in mid game, and the thor change is essentially nothing, or it might be even worse because thors will now start shooting overlords if not taken care of. Didn't blizzard hear complaints about terrans having weaker late game army compared to other races?
Terran isn't strong TvZ midgame. At least they cannot reliably clear up creep/pressure expansions. As long as they reduce bonus damage vs shield with a mine buff, this should be fine. Then mines wont be used in TvP anymore and the matchup will be back at its most broken state again O.o No. TvP is not at its most broken right now. It's not even close to its most broken state right now. Winrates for all match-ups have hovered between 45-55% for a long time. That's actually not that bad when it comes to balancing a game as complex as SC2. According to Aligulac, TvP was at its most broken just after HotS came out and Protoss only had a 42% winrate. TvP in June in Korea (Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague): 17-31 = 35.4% winrate TvP in Code A qualifiers: 20-33 = 37.7% winrate TvP in IEM qualifier this morning: 10-17 = 37% winrate You don't see a trend here? In addition: TvZ in June Korea: 28-22 = 56% TvZ in Code A qualifiers: 30-15 = 66% TvZ in IEM qualifier: 15-13 = 53% So after the hellbat change the matchup has changed quite a bit and I have no idea why blizzard addresses this matchup again instead of nerfig protoss overall strength Counted 24-21 for Shoutcraft + GSL + Proleague and 28-18 for Code A qualifiers but whatever. I explained elsewhere why TvZ winrates are not as bad: On July 04 2014 19:09 TheDwf wrote:
Bio in TvZ needs as much help, yes; Terrans in Korea mostly win thanks to 2 rax, mech and Hellbat timings. This is why winrates are not 35:65 like in TvP, but the fact many Korean Terrans do their best to stay away from triple OC bio macro games scenarii is a pretty telling tale in itself. If you were to run tests for normal 4M vs lings/banes/mutas games, you could expect similarly depressing results. 2 rax = cheese = cannot be used as a standard on all maps. Hellbat timings = new timings so will get weaker over time + likely won't have enough impact to fix bio play because of how 3 hatch builds work (talked about it in the ZParcraft article). Mech = map-dependent + likely will get weaker over time as Zergs refine their answers (soO vs TY on King Sejong is another example of the 7v5 bases stuff). And none of this changes anything to the fact bio play has issues. You would have a point if the patch further buffed mech or Hellbat timings but that's not the case. That argument that "Zergs refine their answers" is pretty weak though, because what hinders Terran to refine their strategies to begin with to deal with the answers - that might not even exist to begin with. No, that's a central argument and it's historically proven. Remember Hellions/Banshees at the end of WoL? 20-30 Drones kills on average during the first days. A few weeks later, losing 10 Drones was considered sloppy. Or just Zerg's play vs 4M at the beginning of HotS and a few months later. There were clear differences in control. You have to factor realistic possibilities of improvement. This process cannot continue forever for both sides because there is a ceiling. What you call "voodoo" is forced, otherwise you can never claim something is imbalanced. Perhaps Terran and Protoss were missing something critical at the end of WoL and broods/infests would have been solved over time? Balancing has to be done on a current status, everything else is vodoo. The current status is 4Terrans in Code S to ~10Zergs, 5foreign Terrans in EU Premier to ~8foreign Zergs and the winrates swinging both ways. With that status being like that for longer. Hence Terran is a little weaker (though it has already been adressed once lately), yet, it looks like rather a small degree compared to TvP issues.
Also, if the only problem was that bio play became the roach/hydra of Terran there wouldn't be any need to patch. Indeed. That's why I specifically mention that the current alternative forms of play that maintain Terran out of the water won't remain as strong to compensate. There needs to be a viable all-around standard. Perhaps BL/Infestor would have been solved. But that's where part two of what I wrote strikes, balancing has to be done on the status quo. The question is why it is realistical that Zergs solve their problems, but Terrans do not. 11/11 exists up to this day and is playable in ZvT. It has never been solved completely.
But neither 2 rax nor Hellbat timings nor mech are a problem for Zerg in the sense they would yield an excessive winrate between opponents of equal skill. I'm not saying 2 rax is bad, just that you can't expect Terrans to use that to maintain winrates in the long run. It's not an unviable opening by any means but it's still primarily an attack metagaming hatch first and requiring a certain rush distance to work (from the outset, it means 2 rax is less usable/less efficient on 4p maps). If Maru keeps opening 2 rax on Merry Go Round, for instance, he'll end up running into a Zerg opening Speedling expand to shut him out, or simply a gasless pool first into lead like Hydra did.
It is not realistic for Terran to solve certain issues because of the ceiling. That's why I used the Automaton 2000 video to highlight this point for the mass Marines vs mass banes scenario. Theoretically Terran can win the fight offcreep with zero loss, but in practice it doesn't matter since it's not humanely doable. Taking a 7th base on a 6v6 map against a meching Terran is not beyond human potential.
Maybe hellbats will get solved so that they won't be playable anymore, but maybe they will just become part of the metagame where a Zerg has to play against a possible hellbat push, whether it comes or not. It's not realistical to assume something is solveable without that adapation weakening the race in another scenario (like macro games when a zerg opens defensive roach against possible hellbats).
It depends on the weight of the threat for standard builds. If you craft a 1-base Battlecruiser all-in in TvP, it will have zero result on Protoss standard builds because you don't force anything. MSC expand into whatever would bash your nonsense. Protoss would barely need to scout what you're doing.
Hellbat timings do carry a serious threat to pure lings/queens builds, but for reasons I already explained Zerg don't need to adopt a middle-of-the-road answer if they can get the "triple OC or 1-1-1 tech" information, for instance. On the long run the impact on standard builds ends up being the price of the information.
|
On July 10 2014 00:29 KatatoniK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2014 00:19 Doodsmack wrote:
How can blizzard be so obtuse that photon overcharge nerf would not be the first thing on their list of balance changes? Photon Overcharge isn't the major issue here, yes it needs tweaking without completely obliterating PvP but there are waaay more pressing issues in regards to PvT. Like Time Warp, the non-existance of Terran lategame and lack of scouting opportunities for Terran early on.
You could half its damage against non-shield or something.
|
On July 10 2014 00:28 Thezzy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2014 00:19 Doodsmack wrote:
How can blizzard be so obtuse that photon overcharge nerf would not be the first thing on their list of balance changes? Because it would return PvP to the 4g vs 4g era thanks to Warp Gate.
I don't understand this argument.
1. PvP was no longer a 4g mirror fest at the end of WoL.
2. Quality of life in a mirror matters less than balance in a non-mirror match-up, unless the mirror is made particularly horrible and one-dimensional by the change(s).
3. Do macro PvP even produce better games than 1-base mirrors?
4. You could add +shields damage anyway to Overcharge to compensate a bit in certain situations.
|
I think Photon Overcharge is fine and no one would have ever legitimately complained about it if Time Warp didn't exist in the first place.
|
Northern Ireland26468 Posts
On July 10 2014 01:47 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I think Photon Overcharge is fine and no one would have ever legitimately complained about it if Time Warp didn't exist in the first place.
Really? I find it a whole lot more problematic than Time Warp, it let's you blindly neuter all sorts of offensive options and has huge range.
Sorry I can't give credit but someone mentioned adding a 10 second charge up phase with PO, quite liked this idea actually as if you panic and hit it with bio steaming into your base and you have no units, you should be taking damage. Meanwhile diligent players or players with good forward scouting can benefit from their defensive prep.
|
On July 10 2014 01:40 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2014 00:28 Thezzy wrote:On July 10 2014 00:19 Doodsmack wrote:
How can blizzard be so obtuse that photon overcharge nerf would not be the first thing on their list of balance changes? Because it would return PvP to the 4g vs 4g era thanks to Warp Gate. I don't understand this argument. 1. PvP was no longer a 4g mirror fest at the end of WoL. 2. Quality of life in a mirror matters less than balance in a non-mirror match-up, unless the mirror is made particularly horrible and one-dimensional by the change(s). 3. Do macro PvP even produce better games than 1-base mirrors? 4. You could add +shields damage anyway to Overcharge to compensate a bit in certain situations.
The more recent PvP's I've seen were often quite aggressive though, with one side often relying entirely on Photon Overcharge to stay alive (which granted feels bad) but you have a good point (War of the Worlds or mass Stalker wars...blegh).
I suppose the best change then would be a range reduction to say 8. (that way Siege units and Colossi can whack at the Nexus and a PO on the natural wouldn't cover the main entrance as much)
I still dislike any +shields damage, it's just too specific. (I suppose +armored damage could work against Stalker pushes?)
Atleast EMP also decloaks and neutralizes energy so it still has uses outside of TvP.
As I mentioned earlier, I'd still like to see a reduction in the MSC's aggression (via movement speed).
It can provide too much support too quickly for a Blink all-in whilst still providing the PO option at the same time.
|
On July 10 2014 01:08 varsovie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2014 23:49 Hider wrote: especailly as terran in general is largely underpresented which means that they in most tournaments should have win/rates above 50% assuming equal balance.
Are you dumb or only dumb? Balanced means 50% win-rate in average if opponents of same caliber, preferably across the whole spectrum (pros and GM to bronze). Not that tournaments should always have the holy 1/3 repartition up to the final.
Why do you make these types of posts to insult other people when you in fact do not understand how the system works at all. You are not gonna have players of equal (skill)caliber playing each other if one race is UP. The stronger race is gonna have more of lesser skilled player taking advantage of their race and thus gets further in tournaments + qualifies for more tournaments than the weaker race. Those players should not have a win/rate of 50/50 against the very few terran players manging to qualify for the same tournament.
That's why it's especially alarming when terran win/rates are below 50%, but not alarming when ZvT or PvT win/rates are below 50%.
|
On July 09 2014 02:20 Acer.Scarlett` wrote:Show nested quote +On July 09 2014 02:15 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
I wonder if thor priority will help (I'm Protoss so I don't know TvZ).
Lowering the time warp duration is interesting... I feel that most of the battle will already be over in 15 seconds (or, at least, the opponent will move out of the time warp during that time) so I feel like a decrease in the duration of photon overcharge would make more sense. Can't really nerf photon overcharge without ruining PvP again
Good point. Maybe instead of nerfing duration they could decrease the damage it does but make it do bonus damage vs units with shields.
|
On July 10 2014 01:52 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2014 01:47 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I think Photon Overcharge is fine and no one would have ever legitimately complained about it if Time Warp didn't exist in the first place. Really? I find it a whole lot more problematic than Time Warp, it let's you blindly neuter all sorts of offensive options and has huge range. Sorry I can't give credit but someone mentioned adding a 10 second charge up phase with PO, quite liked this idea actually as if you panic and hit it with bio steaming into your base and you have no units, you should be taking damage. Meanwhile diligent players or players with good forward scouting can benefit from their defensive prep.
With 10 seconds as charge up time PO would be a lot worse against drops, and mine drops in particular.
Another idea that i read a while back was also quite interesting:
What if you could not build workers as long as the photon overcharge is active?
PvP should not be a counter argument to this change. And the other races also have to sacrifice economy to hold of pressure. Terran has to pull workers to repair, while spores and spines also cost drones. Toss would be a little bit worse of in the midgame if they play greedy without a lot of units.
|
On July 10 2014 01:56 Thezzy wrote:
I still dislike any +shields damage, it's just too specific. (I suppose +armored damage could work against Stalker pushes?)
Atleast EMP also decloaks and neutralizes energy so it still has uses outside of TvP.
We have units and spells that are only used in one match-up, modifiers to massive, biological and psionic that already seem specifically targeted. +shields already exists for the widow mine. I know there's a slippery scope if you start to be careless with this, throwing many modifiers and special rules around to the point that no new player can ever understand the game, but giving photon overcharge a bonus to shield component seems only a minor transgression and it can improve balance and gameplay in the mean time.
Furthermore, looking at damage modifiers is not the right way to understand unit dynamics for a new player. You are better off looking at pro replays, playing the campaign, trying a unit tester, doing nexus wars, even consulting Blizzard's counter chart. The bonus damage values play a role under the surface but you can play the game without ever needing to know them. I'll admit that the widow mine is rather extreme though. The unit deals so much more damage to protoss units than to zerg units that it can be confusing. However, small damage bonuses neatly fit into an understanding of the game based on experience of units fighting each other. In practice you won't notice that marauders are good vs stalkers specifically because of a +armored component. (even pro players often can't give you specific values)
Blizzard could be encouraged to fix the balance at all costs in between expansions, because the player base will be already acquainted with the game and will care more about a solid ladder and tournament experience. Blizzard could then use the expansions to go back and find different solutions.
Of course Blizzard won't because they've stopped caring, which is personally why I'm against specific fixes because they just leave the game with weird artifacts that will never be resolved, but in theory it might be a good idea.
|
These changes seem like they're totally missing the core issues. It's just going to encourage more of the same play we've been seeing all along.
- Some better early game results vs. Protoss with the decreased Time Warp duration
- Some better early/mid game results vs. Zerg with the mine buffs. Possibly the same vs. Protoss
- Lots of late game suffering if P or Z manage to survive mid and get their AoE out
So... yeah.
Seems like a typical Blizzard patch.
|
On July 10 2014 03:06 submarine wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2014 01:52 Wombat_NI wrote:On July 10 2014 01:47 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I think Photon Overcharge is fine and no one would have ever legitimately complained about it if Time Warp didn't exist in the first place. Really? I find it a whole lot more problematic than Time Warp, it let's you blindly neuter all sorts of offensive options and has huge range. Sorry I can't give credit but someone mentioned adding a 10 second charge up phase with PO, quite liked this idea actually as if you panic and hit it with bio steaming into your base and you have no units, you should be taking damage. Meanwhile diligent players or players with good forward scouting can benefit from their defensive prep. With 10 seconds as charge up time PO would be a lot worse against drops, and mine drops in particular. Another idea that i read a while back was also quite interesting: What if you could not build workers as long as the photon overcharge is active? PvP should not be a counter argument to this change. And the other races also have to sacrifice economy to hold of pressure. Terran has to pull workers to repair, while spores and spines also cost drones. Toss would be a little bit worse of in the midgame if they play greedy without a lot of units.
3 probes for complete safety? I'm sure Protosses would take that trade any day if we said we have to nerf their precious PO at all cost. The only place where that might make a difference is PvP... again.
|
Nice changes, I might go and install this game back for some test matches.
|
Northern Ireland26468 Posts
On July 10 2014 04:03 ZenithM wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2014 03:06 submarine wrote:On July 10 2014 01:52 Wombat_NI wrote:On July 10 2014 01:47 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I think Photon Overcharge is fine and no one would have ever legitimately complained about it if Time Warp didn't exist in the first place. Really? I find it a whole lot more problematic than Time Warp, it let's you blindly neuter all sorts of offensive options and has huge range. Sorry I can't give credit but someone mentioned adding a 10 second charge up phase with PO, quite liked this idea actually as if you panic and hit it with bio steaming into your base and you have no units, you should be taking damage. Meanwhile diligent players or players with good forward scouting can benefit from their defensive prep. With 10 seconds as charge up time PO would be a lot worse against drops, and mine drops in particular. Another idea that i read a while back was also quite interesting: What if you could not build workers as long as the photon overcharge is active? PvP should not be a counter argument to this change. And the other races also have to sacrifice economy to hold of pressure. Terran has to pull workers to repair, while spores and spines also cost drones. Toss would be a little bit worse of in the midgame if they play greedy without a lot of units. 3 probes for complete safety? I'm sure Protosses would take that trade any day if we said we have to nerf their precious PO at all cost. The only place where that might make a difference is PvP... again.
Still better than leaving it unchanged ATM.
|
i would like to point out that thor anti air outranges colossus. i have been suggesting this as a colo counter since HotS changed the ability to switch to single target AA. this will make is much more manageable in a larger army. thor change is good, and i would like to see them used more in TvP even if its just one or two. i would really hope that pros utilize this thor payload switch more often, i think it has more uses than we see.
|
On July 10 2014 04:31 fenix404 wrote:
i would like to point out that thor anti air outranges colossus. i have been suggesting this as a colo counter since HotS changed the ability to switch to single target AA. this will make is much more manageable in a larger army. thor change is good, and i would like to see them used more in TvP even if its just one or two. i would really hope that pros utilize this thor payload switch more often, i think it has more uses than we see.
No one would build Thors to deal with Colossi.
|
So if Thors are used against Phoenix-Colossus composition, would they attack Phoenix or Colossus?
|
On July 10 2014 05:11 BellmanFord wrote:
So if Thors are used against Phoenix-Colossus composition, would they attack Phoenix or Colossus?
Units always attack unit that game deal damage to them first. So colossus.
|
On July 10 2014 04:31 fenix404 wrote:
i would like to point out that thor anti air outranges colossus. i have been suggesting this as a colo counter since HotS changed the ability to switch to single target AA. this will make is much more manageable in a larger army. thor change is good, and i would like to see them used more in TvP even if its just one or two. i would really hope that pros utilize this thor payload switch more often, i think it has more uses than we see.
I think the reason you don't see High Impact Payload used to counter colossus is the AA dps vs a colossus is 12, which is pretty low for a four-food unit. Two vikings give you 20 dps and have way better maneuverability.
|
Italy12246 Posts
Farewell Templar openings, it was nice knowing you 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
