EPTPro Opinions: New Proposed Balance Changes - Page 16
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
gneGne
Netherlands697 Posts
| ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On July 22 2014 05:06 gneGne wrote: For me fun is when a game is competitive and you feel you had to really fight for your win. Aren't what you call the strong fun units, also the units which are huge micro sinks? Which also make the micro/macro balance so important? True, but you want to feel like your opponent had to fight for his win too. Unfortunately, most players don't recognize skill from zerg or protoss players because it's less flashy. If it isn't marine splitting or a cool drop trick or something, it's not seen as skill or difficult, regardless of how hard it actually is. | ||
|
Faust852
Luxembourg4004 Posts
On July 22 2014 04:46 Big J wrote: I didnt say a unit must be imbalanced to be fun. I said a strong unit is naturally fun. Reverse side of the implication. And yes, Infestors were considered superfun... go back to destiny and stephano times with them. Noone ever said it wasnt fun to play with them. What wasnt fun was seeing Terrans drop like flies to those units. Just like it wasnt fun to see Protoss die to 1-1-1s over and over again, though playing the 1-1-1 yourself was pretty entertaining. And no, risk/reward doesnt make a unit more or less fun to play with. It makes it more fun to play against it. Flying around with 30mutas and blowing up your shit is however huge fun to me, just not for you. Edit: and there were tons of fun games involving broodord infestor. People just hate and hated on it because the game got stale and it wasnt fair and the winner too predictable which sometimes killed the tension. Similarily to how people got disgusted when all the Zergs were dropping to 4M and how DRGs win in a long TvZ series in 3macro games against Innovation was almost considered a miracle. It might be fun individually when you are playing your ranked ladder game. I'm talking about watching pro tournament. And even casters were bored. And you are exagerating quite a lot saying that 4M was demolishing Z, FYI, winrate were quite equivalent. (50,3% the month prior the WM nerf). | ||
|
Faust852
Luxembourg4004 Posts
On July 22 2014 05:09 Whitewing wrote: True, but you want to feel like your opponent had to fight for his win too. Unfortunately, most players don't recognize skill from zerg or protoss players because it's less flashy. If it isn't marine splitting or a cool drop trick or something, it's not seen as skill or difficult, regardless of how hard it actually is. Yeah, I heard enough of "AMAZING STORMS" "AMAZING FUNGALS" "AWESOME FORCEFIELD" to know that it isn't true and that casters know how to hype ez things like doing some storms on a bio army. | ||
|
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On July 22 2014 05:12 Faust852 wrote: Yeah, I heard enough of "AMAZING STORMS" "AMAZING FUNGALS" "AWESOME FORCEFIELD" to know that it isn't true and that casters know how to hype ez things like doing some storms on a bio army. You're being sarcastic, but you're actually right, casters for the most part don't know anything about skill in the game either, and don't know how to draw attention to such things, they only talk about what's flashy and obvious. It's hard to blame them because that's what you need to do for newbies to get them interested, but for players who actually play the game but not at a very high level (and even some at a high level), it only helps to reinforce the stereotype of no skill. | ||
|
gneGne
Netherlands697 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On July 22 2014 05:10 Faust852 wrote: It might be fun individually when you are playing your ranked ladder game. I'm talking about watching pro tournament. And even casters were bored. And you are exagerating quite a lot saying that 4M was demolishing Z, FYI, winrate were quite equivalent. (50,3% the month prior the WM nerf). The important parts about fun when watching imo are: 1) stuff is happening 2) the game is fair, hence tense BL/Infestor violated 2). You got the banshee harass, the occasional midgame timings, the drops, the occasional mutabuilds, the bigass do or die pushes, the zergling harass, the infestor harass. But you expectes the zerg to win in the lategame. Thats what made it less entertaining. Im talking a bit before that and 4M. I dont think it was imbalanced, but Terrans had a metagame advantage and you expected them to win if Zergs didnt allin and clashed against the Innovation build. He winrates were like 55% in some months. | ||
|
gneGne
Netherlands697 Posts
| ||
|
Mutineer
New Zealand179 Posts
Because right now I believe only Taeja can get in | ||
|
Xinzoe
Korea (South)2373 Posts
On July 22 2014 05:54 Mutineer wrote: Usealy some one here make prediction sheet who can go to blizcon, anyone know about them? Because right now I believe only Taeja can get in im not sure what u mean but http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2014_StarCraft_II_World_Championship_Series/Standings | ||
|
[PkF] Wire
France24192 Posts
 . jjakji will have to play better than what he's been doing lately but he has a good chance. In the end we could have 3-5 Terrans in Blizzcon, which would be of course on the lower side of balance, but not bad at all. | ||
|
VArsovskiSC
Macedonia563 Posts
In say WC3 standards - Terran is the NE, and Protoss is the Orc or the Undead.. The very basic difference is that with NE you focus-fire targets or neutralize them and focus on something else, whilest with Orc or Undead you PRESERVE YOUR key units as long as possible instead.. So yes - that IS THE VERY BASIC like CORE DESIGN LEVEL difference Protoss actually DOES micro, only they micro to PRESERVE rather than focus-fire.. tft Protoss units are DESIGNED that way, they don't clump up, instead they bump of each other so no more than say like 6 or 7 units at a time can shoot at a Target and most of them have some kind of a "self-survival" ability in one or another way.. Terran on the other hand have units designed to shoot like 15, 20 or even 30 units at a time at a one same target.. PROTOSS concept is working well (but there's that "Colossus" problem), whilest Terran one isn't because they don't have a "flow control" as NE had.. The closest thing to flow control Terran have is the Marauder slow and it's kinda partially doing it's thing, but - terrans need a bit of a bigger slow, or some kind of a mid-cost supporting disablers.. Maybe some small AoE flow control of incomming damage (PDD is an overkill, and very situational, and comes from a very expensive unit, something more middle-ground is required).. Like - anything that will allow Terran more time to "prepare" rather than go totally YOLO with what they have once the battles commence Protoss design flaw is the Colossus - it's a DPS support unit that doesn't even need "attention" to work well, so that's where lies the key problem The very basics of design of Terran and Protoss are the following: 1 - Terran uses it's "cheap core units" to chip away from their opponents, the bio does that "pick-off one, pick-off another, pick-off 3rd" target before the "big-battle-engagement" starts, but once there are those big numbers.., The big units are the ones that "should do but don't do" support instead.. Terran support fails at "controlling that flow" so they end up run over.. OR they just overkill the opponent with splash (such as mass Raven's HSM), so that' another different "the total reverse by diameter" problem.. 2 - Protoss on the other hand uses their core units as a FODDER.. Protoss damage dealers and game-changers are EXACTLY THE SUPPORTERS.. Protoss sacrifices Zealots, Stalkers, and stuff so HTs and Colossi can do those BIG HITS, and the Protoss micro is about "area control" as well as PRESERVING your key "targets" and saving them for another day.. That's why WG works SO WELL with the Protoss design, cause it creates/allows more opportunities/chances to PRESERVE exactly those big "shots" you have.. Most of the (at least the well designed Protoss units) have that "survive for another day" mechanic so they can extend their purpose and "overlast" their opponent.. Stalkers have Blink, Sentries have FF and Guardian shields (and even Hallu can also be used that same way - survive for another day by making more, in this particular case - fake - fodder), Voidrays have - well - they have the "retreat" mechanic called micro of a good Protoss player once their shields go low, Colossi have "back off and climb up" mech, Tempars have the Merge button so once they've done "what they can" they can do more again.. The only 2 units that are "exceptions" from that are the Zealots (they're designed to go yolo, hence their role being THE FODDER), and the Archons (but at some specific scenarios Archons can be BOTH - unit that needs preserving and a fodder simultaneously at times, or at least that being dependant of what other units the Protoss has, if Protoss has Stalkers or Colossi then the Archon is a fodder, If the Protoss has Zealot/Sentry then the Archon is a KEY SUPPORTER) Now people may argue about - why a-move zealot, blah, blah, well simply - it's not that the Zealot is the Problem, the only real problem (like only real big problem) Terran have is the Colossus, and that's that.. Everything else Terrans can force the Protoss to micro, but the only unit they can't force the Protoss to have it microed is the Colossus.. As long as Protoss has units that can defend themselves, or synergizedly defend, but also be "highly responsively exposed" to Terran fire, the dynamic is created like that, but - it's simple in this case - all P needs to do is focus the Vikings and voila, you have a KEY unit that doesn't even depend on what Terran forces you to do.. In other words - the flaw is that Terran can't force Protoss micro if they have Colossi, at least not without a big investment, and that's kinda the problem The closest a-move unit that comes next on that list is the Archon, but it's not that much of a game-changer, as long as there weren't those "Colossi" things shooting all the time from the back while you work the sh*t out of your ass of at the front and do your best.. Fighting a rather ordinary Protoss army with Colossi in the back is like trying to fight a knight while there's a rain-of-arrows shooting at you all the time while you try to "duel" So the core game design problem lies in there - Terran needs more "flow control" and Protoss needs more "babysitting support units that do the big swipes instead of an auto-targetting-unit that does not "care" and simply does most of things all by itself.. The Colossus after all "should be" a very key core "have to preserve" unit, but what happens instead is it just shoots on it's own and does the damage  And the real irony about the Terran race is that the "flow control lack" of Terran doesn't get shown in the Protoss matchup, but instead it gets clearly shown from the "3rd race".. The vs Zerg clearly shows that Terran's "lack of flow control" design problem.. So there's another "problem" - Protoss doesn't directly indicate Terran's weakness, so it's not a simple one-matchup tweak, but Zerg does that instead.. Only that the Zerg's designed to be weak overall itself so it doesn't make that Terran weakness in a "too hard of a scale".. If Zergs had a massable unit that has more than 35 hp, then it would be easily shown where the Terran's weakness lies instead So basically there lies that problem, and once Terran has a decent to good flow-control, some space can be "created" so Marines can be nerfed or not even just reworked in a way so they can get a synergetic unit that can make them more "safe" but at the cost at the opponent also having more ways to prevent the Marine from doing the damage.. I still kinda "stand on that" that at least in the attack speed of the Marine could get nerfed for like 10-15% and it wouldn't even be as game-breaking if indeed Terran had what it really lacks - flow control so they can buy more time to "pick-off" more targets, other than doing the direct damage (if support is the deal mass damage type - it creates the problem of forcing the battle in being all about a single hit or miss, which ends up in a whole battle being decided in a single "blink" moment..) It's like - I simply don't see other way to "fix" that problem, it's give Terran a cheaper-ish starport unit that can support core armies instead of being a just another "brick in the wall", i.e. - just another back-door "pile" for the opponent, and then there are a lot more ways that things can be "tweaked" after that So that's like the "broader" looks of things.. That's even why people shouldn't "compare" Marines to Zealots and vice-versa, but you could maybe (and it would be more reasonable) discuss about whether the Marine does too good what it does and the Zealot does too good what it does.. Not to compare if Zeaot does better or the Marine does better, they're designed to be "on the opposite side of the track".. The real good discussion would be is whether you think of that the Marine is too good of a DPS-er (for it's cost) and whether the Zealot is too good of a fodder (for it's cost), but comparing them (on a general level) IMO simply makes no sense (though being too much of a long/broad post, hope it makes things a bit "make more sense") | ||
|
worosei
Australia198 Posts
that being sad, i think time has made me forget why time-warp on oracle was so bad in the first place... | ||
|
Socup
190 Posts
On July 22 2014 14:39 worosei wrote: with the whole reverting of patch things such as with widow-mine... i why not just give time-warp back to the Oracle; makes their use in mid-game much better... and i think solves a bit of the problem with time-warp on the MSC as i think part problem with time-warp is just that it's so easily available as everyone has a MSC already; time-warp isnt as strong with an all-in if ur all-in has to be weaker cause u have to get an oracle... that being sad, i think time has made me forget why time-warp on oracle was so bad in the first place... Remember when there was a spell to lock mineral patches away from being mined? Lol. Currently Thor is prioritizing air until something comes closer like a ling, then it attacks the lings instead of the mutas. | ||
|
Deleted User 261926
960 Posts
On July 22 2014 05:12 Faust852 wrote: Yeah, I heard enough of "AMAZING STORMS" "AMAZING FUNGALS" "AWESOME FORCEFIELD" to know that it isn't true and that casters know how to hype ez things like doing some storms on a bio army. Did you intentionally not mention "AMAZING WIDOW MINE SHOT"? | ||
|
worosei
Australia198 Posts
On July 22 2014 15:13 Socup wrote: Remember when there was a spell to lock mineral patches away from being mined? Lol. Currently Thor is prioritizing air until something comes closer like a ling, then it attacks the lings instead of the mutas. oh lol haha yes yes, time-warp was the new entomb... i think time-warp seemed even crapper compared to time-warp, but now im just imagining constant time-warps with multiple oracles... crap idea,... i'll side with the nerf | ||
|
Faust852
Luxembourg4004 Posts
On July 22 2014 15:38 Karpfen wrote: Did you intentionally not mention "AMAZING WIDOW MINE SHOT"? Yeah maybe, I don't remember a good WM shoot (something that kill maybe 8 banes ?) in ages so. But with the future patch, we'll here that infinitly more often. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9364 Posts
Did you intentionally not mention "AMAZING WIDOW MINE SHOT"? Wel, they actually became quite rare as zergs improved their play. It definitely wasn't quite often in the September-November period we would see Widow Mines suddenly just hit like 7 Banelings or something like that. | ||
|
VArsovskiSC
Macedonia563 Posts
On July 22 2014 16:07 Hider wrote: Wel, they actually became quite rare as zergs improved their play. It definitely wasn't quite often in the September-November period we would see Widow Mines suddenly just hit like 7 Banelings or something like that. Well - that SHOULD actually be/remain like that.. BOTH Storms and Fungals come out from a 150 gas unit, while you wanna "even out" those with a unit that costs only 25 gas, no offense | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9364 Posts
On July 22 2014 16:21 VArsovskiSC wrote: Well - that SHOULD actually be/remain like that.. BOTH Storms and Fungals come out from a 150 gas unit, while you wanna "even out" those with a unit that costs only 25 gas, no offense Well, yeh, and since it wasn't like that prior to the Widow Mine buff, then we can easily go back there anyway. Then only bad zergs will get punished if they do not split their units priorly. The same concept can be applied to Banelings. Terrans who have bad unit control get punished, but when your using them against terrans with better control, it's quite unlikely you get situations where 5 banelings kill 25 Marines (etc.) The issue with how they work currently is that it's AOE isn't large enough to really reward any type of split-micro. As zerg you can simply right click your banelings and amove your banelings (if there isn't maurauder/Thors - if there is you also right click banelings) in a big group. That's a very big assymetry in terms of micro requirements relative to what terran has to do, and I don't think you will see any zergs deny that. Back when Widow Mines had larger AOE, it took more micro and skill as zerg to engage, which I personally found made the game better. Ofc there was this period early HOTS where it looked too strong, but after zergs adapted and received the Overseer buff, the matchup started to feel much more dynamic and fair. Since balance statistically looked great and we had lots of great matches in the September-November period, and balance today isn't good, it makes sense to go back to what we know worked well and revert the Widow Mine nerf. The original Widow Mine nerf would only succeed in "rebalancing" the game on the premise that the Tank/Widow Mine synergy would be good enough so that players would mix them in together. That was, however, a flawed assumption and I don't believe it's realistic to get that work in HOTS. FYI, Gas isn't really something you worry about when you go 4M. You could easily change cost to 50/50 instead and terrans would just get 6 geysers instead of 5 in the midgame and be fine. With this type of logic, you could also argue that Ghosts are OP since they cost 100Gas and HT's UP since they cost 150gas. If anything, the contrary is closer to the truth, thus this is a very poor variable to look at when assessing balance. Instead, balancewise, the question one must answer is whether terran gets good enough trades given how the zerg production/macroeconomics (incl. creep spread) work, and which variable is the correct one to change in order to improve both balance and gameplay. | ||
| ||
