Thank you for playing on the balance test map and giving us detailed feedback on not only the current changes being tested but also the previous changes that were discussed and tested. After gathering more feedback, playtesting in more detail, and analyzing recent games at the highest level, we’ve decided that we’d like to implement a balance patch with the changes that are currently being tested.
We believe the Thor change is effective and will be quite safe, while the Widow Mine change is significant and pushes the strength of the unit to the point that it’s a major threat. The Time Warp change will also have a significant impact, however, we feel that both the strength of Protoss and weakness of Terran in the highest level tournaments has continued a bit too long and we’d like to act with a bigger set of changes this time around.
While we feel these changes are significant, we’ve also heard feedback that they may not be drastic enough. In either case, we feel there is a higher than normal chance that current strategies will be heavily impacted. We’ll be watching closely after the patch is released to make sure that everything is going as expected with Protoss and Terran and we’ll focus our efforts in the coming weeks to make sure the game is in a better state. Thank you for everyone’s help, and we look forward to seeing the results of the next patch soon.
Awesome, a buff to the most annoying unit in the game.
Honestly I don't think it will change too much. Templar openings are dead anyway. Hopefully they leave the game alone long enough for people to adapt this time...
I don't think it will change the meta at all. It's just going to make things that Terrans currently do stronger.
But if the goal is for Terran to win more games then making Terran units stronger will help. Protoss will have to be a bit more careful with their observers and Zealots, I guess.
On July 23 2014 02:56 sCnInfinity wrote: I like the fact that they are willing to make bigger changes, but i'm afraid that telling the patch "not drastic enough" might push things too far.
They should wait for some weeks to see how it works out with the current changes.
Well, I think the changes are quite safe. Thor? Yeh, not gamechanging Widow Mine? We already had this one in TvZ before and we know it worked. TvP we know it is very good vs templar, and sucks vs Collosus. Now it might be decent vs Collosus and even better vs Templar, which noone really went anyway. Timewarp? Pretty dumb and "OP" before. Now the dumbness has been scaled down and this is probably good for overall balance. Maybe it's a small buff to scv-pulls though which isn't desireable (though they have kinda been figured out anyway).
On July 23 2014 02:57 DinoMight wrote: Awesome, a buff to the most annoying unit in the game.
Honestly I don't think it will change too much. Templar openings are dead anyway. Hopefully they leave the game alone long enough for people to adapt this time...
I disagree, Dts are definitely the most annoying unit in the game
On July 23 2014 03:13 Lunareste wrote: buff tanks ;_;
just fucking buff tanks, blizzard.
this.
all this patch will do is make terrible terrans occasionally be able to beat better zergs with lucky skilless widowmine shots, and occasionally let worse zergs beat better terrans with widowmine selfkills...
Tanks require very good strategy positioning and target fire, widow mines require nothing? Possibly make an upgrade at the armory that gives tank whatever their original damage was (55-60?), and possibly an upgrade to reduce siege time. (buffing the tank without nerfing the raven and sh would create a ton of problems mech tvz though).
On July 23 2014 03:13 Lunareste wrote: buff tanks ;_;
just fucking buff tanks, blizzard.
this.
all this patch will do is make terrible terrans occasionally be able to beat better zergs with lucky skilless widowmine shots, and occasionally let worse zergs beat better terrans with widowmine selfkills...
Tanks require very good strategy positioning and target fire, widow mines require nothing? Possibly make an upgrade at the armory that gives tank whatever their original damage was (55-60?), and possibly an upgrade to reduce siege time. (buffing the tank without nerfing the raven and sh would create a ton of problems mech tvz though).
people like you claiming there is no micro/positionning with wm play are hilarious.
They're actually going ahead with ALL those suggestions? The Thor one was the only good one there :/
PvZ is about to get seriously messy with that TW change. 100 energy for 10 second duration, what a horrible, horrible joke. There's much better ways of fixing TW, try those instead.
As for the mine buff, just lol. Yeah Blizz, buff Terran mid-game where they're already stupidly strong instead of fixing the ACTUAL problem of T having no late game.
Really not impressed with this patch at all, it fixes absolutely nothing.
Unleash the kraken... uhm I mean Terrans But on a more serious note, I wish the just buffed the tank and thor vs zerg so that they can fill the mines role and just nerfed all the protoss early game all ins with for eg turret without ebay or pf nexus vs bio nerf so they cant just proxy random shit in a random location and always at least break even or ahead.
On July 23 2014 03:27 KatatoniK wrote: As for the mine buff, just lol. Yeah Blizz, buff Terran mid-game where they're already stupidly strong instead of fixing the ACTUAL problem of T having no late game.
Disagree, actually. Terran late game army made of MMM, Vikings and Ghost can deal with Protoss Deathball effectively. Getting to late game on even footing is harder when they have to worry about certain allins.
So if they are a little stronger in the mid-game, it lets them catch up economically and recover from that super early blind Engineering bay they made, for example.
I like that they realize the change is substantial and are going to go ahead and roll it out anyway. They tend to shy away from anything that makes a "substantial" impact on gameplay.
A lot of players are going to start showing us some sick micro, I believe, when adapting to these changes. I personally really like the Time Warp change. Widow Mine might need a bit more tweaking, I think. But we'll see.
On July 23 2014 03:31 DinoMight wrote: I just fucking hate widow mines.
I also hate Widow Mines. They're not fun to use as a Terran player, they're infuriating to play against and I find them pretty boring to watch in pro matches since there's little micro involved once they're burrowed.
On July 23 2014 03:31 DinoMight wrote: I just fucking hate widow mines.
I also hate Widow Mines. They're not fun to use as a Terran player, they're infuriating to play against and I find them pretty boring to watch in pro matches since there's little micro involved once they're burrowed.
David Kim won't shut up about how exciting they are to watch. He really really likes them.
Sigh. This is really not what they should have done. Also it doesnt touch PvT in any way shape or form imo (other than makin scv pull stronger, hooray!) ;(
oh no, those protoss and zerg forum heroes here might actually start losing games against terran again. Better start balance whining again, how OP terran already is even without those buffs.
On July 23 2014 03:35 Digitalis wrote: So can I put high impact payload on my thors and expect them to smack colossus from really far away now?
Thors are as stupid as before AI wise they just derp the other way round. So don't expect them to do clever things.
So the Widowmine is at its limit. Why not bring the Siege tank at its limit, instead of keeping it at the minimum damage level. Don't say TvT, Tank Viking won't work on the current maps.
Oh and poor Zealots, with only 10 seconds of Timewarp support Ling only might actually work again for Zerg against the Zealot trading. Atleast I had a few problems with it.
Man, and Zergs had finally managed to become civil on ladder again. Now, even if i continue to not use mines, I'll probably be eating toxin each time I play TvZ
On July 23 2014 03:13 Lunareste wrote: buff tanks ;_;
just fucking buff tanks, blizzard.
this.
all this patch will do is make terrible terrans occasionally be able to beat better zergs with lucky skilless widowmine shots, and occasionally let worse zergs beat better terrans with widowmine selfkills...
Tanks require very good strategy positioning and target fire, widow mines require nothing? Possibly make an upgrade at the armory that gives tank whatever their original damage was (55-60?), and possibly an upgrade to reduce siege time. (buffing the tank without nerfing the raven and sh would create a ton of problems mech tvz though).
people like you claiming there is no micro/positionning with wm play are hilarious.
On July 23 2014 03:13 Lunareste wrote: buff tanks ;_;
just fucking buff tanks, blizzard.
this.
all this patch will do is make terrible terrans occasionally be able to beat better zergs with lucky skilless widowmine shots, and occasionally let worse zergs beat better terrans with widowmine selfkills...
Tanks require very good strategy positioning and target fire, widow mines require nothing? Possibly make an upgrade at the armory that gives tank whatever their original damage was (55-60?), and possibly an upgrade to reduce siege time. (buffing the tank without nerfing the raven and sh would create a ton of problems mech tvz though).
people like you claiming there is no micro/positionning with wm play are hilarious.
On July 23 2014 03:22 Faust852 wrote:
On July 23 2014 03:14 DinoMight wrote: I might start opening 2 Robos lol.
One for nonstop Observers and one for actual Robo units.
Why not 3 robos?
when you float 1k/1k it's definitely doable.
people like you who are not even korean gm, and commenting on micro/balance are hilarious.
In their defense, even korean gms have opposing opinions on balance, so it hardly has any meaning at all
If hots release widow mines were "balanced" once Zergs figured out how to play agaisnt them (last month of those mines was 50.3% winrate in favor of Zerg I think).
Then how the hell is Zerg supposed to win with buffed tanks AND hellbats in addition?
On July 23 2014 03:38 Tsubbi wrote: zergs are gonna get vaporized, unnerfed mines, free hellbats and buffed tanks, gl all
meanwhile protoss will continue to win everything
DreamHack winners so far: Zerg, Terran, Zerg IEM winner: Terran Red Bull Battlegrounds: Terran HomeStory Cup: Terran MLG Anaheim: Protoss
Protoss totally winning everything recently.
winning a lot recently, yes.
I noticed you didn't list WCS for this season?
Update pls?
He said Protoss was winning EVERYTHING, I proved him wrong, my list doesn't need updating. Try reading before mounting your high horse and parading it around.
I foresee a new zerg versus terran strategy. Make about 4 mutas. Once the thors come out, mass roaches and send the overlords in first.
I mean, prioritizing air over ground could create some interesting opportunities. Not that I imagine it would be common, or even that successful, but there are probably some things that could come about from the more creative pros.
On July 23 2014 03:38 Tsubbi wrote: zergs are gonna get vaporized, unnerfed mines, free hellbats and buffed tanks, gl all
meanwhile protoss will continue to win everything
DreamHack winners so far: Zerg, Terran, Zerg IEM winner: Terran Red Bull Battlegrounds: Terran HomeStory Cup: Terran MLG Anaheim: Protoss
Protoss totally winning everything recently.
winning a lot recently, yes.
I noticed you didn't list WCS for this season?
Update pls?
He said Protoss was winning EVERYTHING, I proved him wrong, my list doesn't need updating. Try reading before mounting your high horse and parading it around.
When you're not able to understand hyperbole, you really shouldn't make idiotic arguments.
He's exaggerating when he says that they're winning everything, but what he means is that Protoss is having an abnormally large amount of success for the past 6+ months, which is undeniable.
Btw, Protoss sweeping WCS might be relevant to your argument because it counters it.
On July 23 2014 03:56 DinoMight wrote: Hold on though.
If hots release widow mines were "balanced."
Then how the hell is Zerg supposed to win with buffed tanks AND hellbats in addition?
Only avilo and his fanbase thinks mines were balanced at hots release
Not at release, but once Zergs learned to fight it (and got OS speed buff).
We will see how things evolve. There probably will have a huge spike in terran's favor. There's no denying it. But it will eventually even out like it did before the WMs nerf.
On July 23 2014 04:03 felisconcolori wrote: I foresee a new zerg versus terran strategy. Make about 4 mutas. Once the thors come out, mass roaches and send the overlords in first.
I mean, prioritizing air over ground could create some interesting opportunities. Not that I imagine it would be common, or even that successful, but there are probably some things that could come about from the more creative pros.
Don't Thors prioritise actual threats first thus the overlords won't get targeted?
I like these changes. If blizzard keeps going in the right direction there may still be hope when lotv rolls around The mine changes seems a bit strong tho. Unless Im reading it wrong its basically reverting it back to what WM was on release + shield damage buff? Seems strong. WM in TvZ was strong but fun to watch, since zergs were running suicide bomber lings ala DT drops on spider mines in BW, but for TvP as long as it stops the stupid Blink strats properly again I think it should be fine already.
Still, the fact that this game used to rape my laptop up and down doesnt change the fact that I wont be playing for the fear of my poor laptop >_>
magic damage that high burst in that quantity really makes upgrades less impactful, it makes economy less impactful.. id like the widow mine a lot better if it wasn't spell damage, it would be a lot more interesting if you could actually upgrade out of 1-2 hit kill zone in aoe, much like every other aoe in the game that don't cost mana.
On July 23 2014 04:03 felisconcolori wrote: I foresee a new zerg versus terran strategy. Make about 4 mutas. Once the thors come out, mass roaches and send the overlords in first.
I mean, prioritizing air over ground could create some interesting opportunities. Not that I imagine it would be common, or even that successful, but there are probably some things that could come about from the more creative pros.
Don't Thors prioritise actual threats first thus the overlords won't get targeted?
Good point. I'm not sure, I was only Zerg for one season and I'm horrible to begin with. But we'll see - it would be interesting to see if something like that could be done.
Or maybe they could make the payload options worthwhile. Rarely ever see someone switch between AoE and Single Target on the air attack.
(Going full Goliath upgrade for "air and ground fire at the same time" would be a bit much, but it would be fun as a terran.)
On July 23 2014 04:10 darkscream wrote: oh man.. widow mines are a lot like wol fungal
magic damage that high burst in that quantity really makes upgrades less impactful, it makes economy less impactful.. id like the widow mine a lot better if it wasn't spell damage, it would be a lot more interesting if you could actually upgrade out of 1-2 hit kill zone in aoe, much like every other aoe in the game that don't cost mana.
The fact that it doesn't lock down units is still quite a huge difference :p
On July 23 2014 03:38 Tsubbi wrote: zergs are gonna get vaporized, unnerfed mines, free hellbats and buffed tanks, gl all
meanwhile protoss will continue to win everything
DreamHack winners so far: Zerg, Terran, Zerg IEM winner: Terran Red Bull Battlegrounds: Terran HomeStory Cup: Terran MLG Anaheim: Protoss
Protoss totally winning everything recently.
winning a lot recently, yes.
I noticed you didn't list WCS for this season?
Update pls?
He said Protoss was winning EVERYTHING, I proved him wrong, my list doesn't need updating. Try reading before mounting your high horse and parading it around.
When you're not able to understand hyperbole, you really shouldn't make idiotic arguments.
He's exaggerating when he says that they're winning everything, but what he means is that Protoss is having an abnormally large amount of success for the past 6+ months, which is undeniable.
Btw, Protoss sweeping WCS might be relevant to your argument because it counters it.
What argument? Please do elaborate on whatever argument I have apparently typed up, I don't recall doing such thing. All I did was throw some tournies up to show that Protoss aren't AS dominating as people seem to believe they are.
So code A tomorrow and the day after is going to be with the patch, cause as far as I remember it took them almost a week to put the previous patch live.
Thanks Blizz, Terran will for sure be better off verse Protoss early game and Protoss and Zerg in the late game. You know, the times Terran was lacking and needed help with #yaymoremmmminmidgame!
On July 23 2014 03:56 DinoMight wrote: Hold on though.
If hots release widow mines were "balanced" once Zergs figured out how to play agaisnt them (last month of those mines was 50.3% winrate in favor of Zerg I think).
Then how the hell is Zerg supposed to win with buffed tanks AND hellbats in addition?
Buffed Tanks as in "-0.2 in attack speed". As for Hellbats openings, they were more powerful at the beginning of HotS.
On July 23 2014 02:56 sCnInfinity wrote: I like the fact that they are willing to make bigger changes, but i'm afraid that telling the patch "not drastic enough" might push things too far.
They should wait for some weeks to see how it works out with the current changes.
Well, I think the changes are quite safe. Thor? Yeh, not gamechanging Widow Mine? We already had this one in TvZ before and we know it worked. TvP we know it is very good vs templar, and sucks vs Collosus. Now it might be decent vs Collosus and even better vs Templar, which noone really went anyway. Timewarp? Pretty dumb and "OP" before. Now the dumbness has been scaled down and this is probably good for overall balance. Maybe it's a small buff to scv-pulls though which isn't desireable (though they have kinda been figured out anyway).
The only problem with your statement is that the reason no-one utilized templar openings before was because of the Widow Mine change that allows them to do bonus versus Shields. Now, any opening that does not involve some form of mobile detection is dead and is why PvT has gotten rather stale. Taking away the vs shields damage would actually breathe life back into Templar play and help diversify the matchup, but in its current state, not going robo or oracle into robo in PvT is such a big risk that it simply isn't worth the gamble.
I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic. Also, I don't see how changing the time it lasts is going to affect much when the units it's "OP" against will die before 10 seconds are up anyway. I mean, this really only hurts PvP and really isn't the change I, as a Protoss, was hoping would come to the MSC and its abilities.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
I get that protoss is upset Templar openings are wrecked, but wtf, Terran has had 1 opening for a long time now. Work with us a little here.... maybe LoTV will bring new units... calm thy tits.
On July 23 2014 03:56 DinoMight wrote: Hold on though.
If hots release widow mines were "balanced" once Zergs figured out how to play agaisnt them (last month of those mines was 50.3% winrate in favor of Zerg I think).
Then how the hell is Zerg supposed to win with buffed tanks AND hellbats in addition?
Buffed Tanks as in "-0.2 in attack speed". As for Hellbats openings, they were more powerful at the beginning of HotS.
you obviously have no idea how scaling works. Do you think such a "minor" -0.2 attack speed buff would be the same for a hydra as it is for a tank? For hard hitting units like tanks even a seemingly small buff to attack speed is huge, that's why they reverted it from the originally proposed 2.7 to 2.8.
If that buff made no difference as you claim, why would Bomber suddenly use bio tank not only as something he fondled with but as one of his main TvZ strats after the patch went through? Obviously that change was important enough to affect his gameplay
On July 23 2014 02:56 sCnInfinity wrote: I like the fact that they are willing to make bigger changes, but i'm afraid that telling the patch "not drastic enough" might push things too far.
They should wait for some weeks to see how it works out with the current changes.
Well, I think the changes are quite safe. Thor? Yeh, not gamechanging Widow Mine? We already had this one in TvZ before and we know it worked. TvP we know it is very good vs templar, and sucks vs Collosus. Now it might be decent vs Collosus and even better vs Templar, which noone really went anyway. Timewarp? Pretty dumb and "OP" before. Now the dumbness has been scaled down and this is probably good for overall balance. Maybe it's a small buff to scv-pulls though which isn't desireable (though they have kinda been figured out anyway).
The only problem with your statement is that the reason no-one utilized templar openings before was because of the Widow Mine change that allows them to do bonus versus Shields. Now, any opening that does not involve some form of mobile detection is dead and is why PvT has gotten rather stale. Taking away the vs shields damage would actually breathe life back into Templar play and help diversify the matchup, but in its current state, not going robo or oracle into robo in PvT is such a big risk that it simply isn't worth the gamble.
I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic. Also, I don't see how changing the time it lasts is going to affect much when the units it's "OP" against will die before 10 seconds are up anyway. I mean, this really only hurts PvP and really isn't the change I, as a Protoss, was hoping would come to the MSC and its abilities.
I like how you think the TvP is stale because you can't no longer do shitty allin without robo. TvP is stale since 2010 bro.
Thanks to the new patch, Blizzard may as well remove the Mothership from the game. What justifies upgrading when you can have a mothership core with Photon Overcharge?
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
You know, time warp is biggest reason that allows zealot/immortal/archon play in PvP.
On July 23 2014 04:34 darkness wrote: Thanks to the new patch, Blizzard may as well remove the Mothership from the game. What justifies upgrading when you can have a mothership core with Photon Overcharge?
Mothership is useful for Skytoss as well as against Swarm Host play in PvZ. More viable than Carriers in fact.
On July 23 2014 04:34 darkness wrote: Thanks to the new patch, Blizzard may as well remove the Mothership from the game. What justifies upgrading when you can have a mothership core with Photon Overcharge?
Oh, let's welcome WoL back. Protoss never moves out before 200/200 if it's not all in. PvP colo vs colo. Awesome idea
Great news, I like that they didn't sit on this for weeks. We have quite enough material by now to say that protoss is a bit too strong and terran a bit too weak, and I see no point in pretending otherwise. I still can't really wrap my head around how 2x 30 sec time warp made it to live in the first place, but I'm glad it's getting fixed.
Still a little unsure about the super mines, but I don't think they'll break anything. can always get a smaller adjustment later if they turn out to be too strong. And honestly, if terran gets to be a little strong for a while, they've kind of earned it.
Im so going to play Terran in the next days. Building double ebays at the front - to tank all the 1-1 roach and roach/baneling damage with my wall while my siege tanks are going to blow all the incoming cheeses up. Muhahahahaha
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
On July 23 2014 03:56 DinoMight wrote: Hold on though.
If hots release widow mines were "balanced" once Zergs figured out how to play agaisnt them (last month of those mines was 50.3% winrate in favor of Zerg I think).
Then how the hell is Zerg supposed to win with buffed tanks AND hellbats in addition?
Buffed Tanks as in "-0.2 in attack speed". As for Hellbats openings, they were more powerful at the beginning of HotS.
you obviously have no idea how scaling works. Do you think such a "minor" -0.2 attack speed buff would be the same for a hydra as it is for a tank? For hard hitting units like tanks even a seemingly small buff to attack speed is huge, that's why they reverted it from the originally proposed 2.7 to 2.8.
If that buff made no difference as you claim, why would Bomber suddenly use bio tank not only as something he fondled with but as one of his main TvZ strats after the patch went through? Obviously that change was important enough to affect his gameplay
Which is probably why he was already playing it 3 months before the buff?
i don't like the Mine change. Seriously, the Terrans got stronger again lately, especially in TvZ and NOW they buff Terran? Why?
And as a mediocre player, the new mines will make the matchup unplayable again, imo. :-/ (Although I agree that they shouldn't really care about lower leagues, it's still annoying :-P )
On July 23 2014 05:06 Swisslink wrote: i don't like the Mine change. Seriously, the Terrans got stronger again lately, especially in TvZ and NOW they buff Terran?
Which Terrans that have not already been the top Terrans before are winning a lot in TvZ Lategames recently? I can't think of any.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
I actually completely agree about the marine, and I wrote a fairly lengthy post about it in the pros' opinions thread. I think it does bad things to terran, and is holding the race back.
As for PO, I strongly dislike it, it makes protoss too safe in the early game and removes a significant amount of options specifically for zerg to do anything creative or aggressive before you get a 3+ base economy. It feels too rewarding for its ease of use and allows bad play to go unpunished, much like recall.
This might be a step in the right direction for TvZ! Now we need to do something about late game TvP and the viability of different Protoss unit comps.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Trust me, there are a LOT of Zerg and Protoss players who think the Marine is designed quite stupidly.
It almost requires the whole game to be balanced around it simply because it's a RANGED Tier 1 unit (the other 2 are Melee) available right from the beginning that remains relevant all game long due to stim and medivacs.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Nice troll post you got there. Let see, where to begin...
First of all marines only become cost effective with good micro. Amove them like you do with zealots and they will die incredibly quickly. Secondly, marines suck ass against pretty much all Protoss high tech units: archons, templar, collosus. No matter how godly your marine micro is, marines will get slaughtered by these units. Yes marines, have high dps, but they are have low hitpoints, are slow, and cannot be warped in. Each race's tier 1 unit has its own strengths and weakness, but to claim that the marine is somehow overpowered is the most ridiculous crap I ever heard.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Trust me, there are a LOT of Zerg and Protoss players who think the Marine is designed quite stupidly.
It almost requires the whole game to be balanced around it simply because it's a RANGED Tier 1 unit (the other 2 are Melee) available right from the beginning that remains relevant all game long due to stim and medivacs.
It really feels like trying to buff the gas units of terran is almost guaranteed to result in some incredibly powerful Marine plus [insert gas unit] timing that just kills zerg especially. I have no idea how the terran late game can actually be improved given how accessible their tier 2 units are and how well the production synergizes with the mineral-only super tier 1 unit.
To me it seems like almost every other terran unit has to exist around the marine rather than alongside it.
On July 23 2014 05:06 Swisslink wrote: i don't like the Mine change. Seriously, the Terrans got stronger again lately, especially in TvZ and NOW they buff Terran?
Which Terrans that have not already been the top Terrans before are winning a lot in TvZ Lategames recently? I can't think of any.
Uhm... counter question: In which tournament has the winrate in TvZ been below 50% lately? Dreamhack probably. Couldn't find another one :-P
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Terran is flawed? Now I've seen it all.
They're all flawed. But yes, designing an entire race's roster to be nothing but support units for their first, cheap, low tech military unit is pretty silly.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
If you think "tier 1" units should not be usable or useful in late game situations, you should play another RTS game.
Protoss did not have MSC in WoL. They did not "die to stim pushes every game."
Terran has a flawed late game due to units / synergies between units, but from a fundamental mechanics standpoint it is not flawed. It is the most "vanilla RTS style" race in SC2.
People complaining about stim... I feel like it's 2010 again.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Trust me, there are a LOT of Zerg and Protoss players who think the Marine is designed quite stupidly.
It almost requires the whole game to be balanced around it simply because it's a RANGED Tier 1 unit (the other 2 are Melee) available right from the beginning that remains relevant all game long due to stim and medivacs.
It really feels like trying to buff the gas units of terran is almost guaranteed to result in some incredibly powerful Marine plus [insert gas unit] timing that just kills zerg especially. I have no idea how the terran late game can actually be improved given how accessible their tier 2 units are and how well the production synergizes with the mineral-only super tier 1 unit.
To me it seems like almost every other terran unit has to exist around the marine rather than alongside it.
Lol. Could you please provide one example of this uberstrong marine+x timings that work well? It's not like a small buff to a underused unit would instantly result in overpowered madness. There is quite a lot of room between these two extremes. And to all this "marine op" talk: Haha. Marines are so OP that you can not even use them offensively in the early game in any mu apart from proxy all ins. They need specific upgrades, production, support units and a lot of attention to be effective. They are to core of bio terran strats. That's fine. Stop crying about it.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Terran is flawed? Now I've seen it all.
They're all flawed. But yes, designing an entire race's roster to be nothing but support units for their first, cheap, low tech military unit is pretty silly.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Terran is flawed? Now I've seen it all.
They're all flawed. But yes, designing an entire race's roster to be nothing but support units for their first, cheap, low tech military unit is pretty silly.
For what reason please? AFAIK infantry was the core of every army for hundreds of years. Let's attack a country with 600 catapults and 20 foot soldiers.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Terran is flawed? Now I've seen it all.
They're all flawed. But yes, designing an entire race's roster to be nothing but support units for their first, cheap, low tech military unit is pretty silly.
Why?
Because it means the later tier units have to be weaker, which creates a situation where there is no incentive to tech up.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Terran is flawed? Now I've seen it all.
They're all flawed. But yes, designing an entire race's roster to be nothing but support units for their first, cheap, low tech military unit is pretty silly.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Terran is flawed? Now I've seen it all.
They're all flawed. But yes, designing an entire race's roster to be nothing but support units for their first, cheap, low tech military unit is pretty silly.
Why?
Because it means the later tier units have to be weaker, which creates a situation where there is no incentive to tech up.
What you don't understand is that terrans t2 and t3 units are marines. They scales with upgrades and support. making them stronger. SC2 is an asymetrical game and a don't see why terrans can't have an army based on t1 units. The game isn't imbalanced because of marines. It never was.
So I don't get it. Apparently, TvP is the most glaring problem atm - but if that is so, why are most changes based on an anti Ling-Bling-Muta idea? Honest question, I don't dare to comment on balance issues with my gold league skill.
I fear I will need to abandon ship on LBM in ZvT, since I already had a hard time against mines... guess It will be roach timings as a default from now on in ZvT
On July 23 2014 06:13 Nozral wrote: So I don't get it. Apparently, TvP is the most glaring problem atm - but if that is so, why are most changes based on a anti Ling-Bling-Muta idea? Honest question, I don't dare to comment on balance issues with my gold league skill.
I fear I will need to abandon ship on LBM in ZvT, since I already had a hard time against mines... guess It will be roach timings as a default from now on in ZvT
Good question. I think a better option would be to introduce an HP upgrade for marauders for late game. Marauders aren't going to mess up with TvZ, so all is good.
On July 23 2014 06:13 Nozral wrote: So I don't get it. Apparently, TvP is the most glaring problem atm - but if that is so, why are most changes based on a anti Ling-Bling-Muta idea? Honest question, I don't dare to comment on balance issues with my gold league skill.
I fear I will need to abandon ship on LBM in ZvT, since I already had a hard time against mines... guess It will be roach timings as a default from now on in ZvT
Good question. I think a better option would be to introduce an HP upgrade for marauders for late game. Marauders aren't going to mess up with TvZ, so all is good.
I think this sounds like a good idea, since it might help against ultra infestor
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
If you think "tier 1" units should not be usable or useful in late game situations, you should play another RTS game.
Terran has a flawed late game due to units, but from a fundamental standpoint it is not flawed. It is the most "vanilla RTS style" race in SC2.
People complaining about stim... I feel like it's 2010 again.
I never said they shouldn't be usable, I said they shouldn't be the CORE unit of an entire army for the entire duration of a game for 50 mineral outlay. Protoss can't function on mostly Zealots once it gets to late game and Zerg can't focus on mostly Zerglings except for harassment. That's their function at late game, they harass economy as well as help support the beefier tech army. An early game unit should not be able to effectively maul through pretty much everything else thrown at it with the support of other units, they should go from useful early game defence/offence to a support role for the beefier tech units. What's the point in having more expensive higher tech units if they're just going to be overshadowed by the very first unit you can produce in the game that's super cheap?
First of all, I always felt Roach Hydra (into <so many options>) was a sick composition in ZvT. So Zergs, maybe it's your time to bring some diversity. And don't pull the "can't defend multiple locations" card. Just get used to the idea to split up army when you're trying to be defensive.
Also, remember what great transitions you have... didnt the Muta into Ultra play eventually become boring too?
Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
If you think "tier 1" units should not be usable or useful in late game situations, you should play another RTS game.
Terran has a flawed late game due to units, but from a fundamental standpoint it is not flawed. It is the most "vanilla RTS style" race in SC2.
People complaining about stim... I feel like it's 2010 again.
I never said they shouldn't be usable, I said they shouldn't be the CORE unit of an entire army for the entire duration of a game for 50 mineral outlay. Protoss can't function on mostly Zealots once it gets to late game and Zerg can't focus on mostly Zerglings except for harassment. That's their function at late game, they harass economy as well as help support the beefier tech army. An early game unit should not be able to effectively maul through pretty much everything else thrown at it with the support of other units, they should go from useful early game defence/offence to a support role for the beefier tech units. What's the point in having more expensive higher tech units if they're just going to be overshadowed by the very first unit you can produce in the game that's super cheap?
Have you never seen Protoss have huge numbers of zealots in late-game PvT, or Zerg going ling/bane/muta all game vs. Terran (plus some Ultras thrown in at the end)? It's pretty standard. All three units are core components of a balanced army composition. I think there's a more systemic issue at play regarding the other two races, when they're not able to use their core mineral dumps in the non-vT match ups for anything other than harassment in late game (zealot prism warp-ins, ling run bys, etc.).
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
On July 23 2014 06:13 Nozral wrote: So I don't get it. Apparently, TvP is the most glaring problem atm - but if that is so, why are most changes based on a anti Ling-Bling-Muta idea? Honest question, I don't dare to comment on balance issues with my gold league skill.
I fear I will need to abandon ship on LBM in ZvT, since I already had a hard time against mines... guess It will be roach timings as a default from now on in ZvT
Good question. I think a better option would be to introduce an HP upgrade for marauders for late game. Marauders aren't going to mess up with TvZ, so all is good.
I think this sounds like a good idea, since it might help against ultra infestor
Well, my suggestion was intended for TvP mainly but I guess it may help TvZ as well.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
If you think "tier 1" units should not be usable or useful in late game situations, you should play another RTS game.
Terran has a flawed late game due to units, but from a fundamental standpoint it is not flawed. It is the most "vanilla RTS style" race in SC2.
People complaining about stim... I feel like it's 2010 again.
I never said they shouldn't be usable, I said they shouldn't be the CORE unit of an entire army for the entire duration of a game for 50 mineral outlay. Protoss can't function on mostly Zealots once it gets to late game and Zerg can't focus on mostly Zerglings except for harassment. That's their function at late game, they harass economy as well as help support the beefier tech army. An early game unit should not be able to effectively maul through pretty much everything else thrown at it with the support of other units, they should go from useful early game defence/offence to a support role for the beefier tech units. What's the point in having more expensive higher tech units if they're just going to be overshadowed by the very first unit you can produce in the game that's super cheap?
What are you on? Zerglings are critical in late game ZvT. I feel like you're playing/watching the wrong RTS. The most exciting plays/games of SC2 revolve T1/T1.5 units like the zergling, marine and stalker microing. Those beat laser fights, broodling wars or battlecruiser pew pew any day
Going on rants about Terran? Never go on rants about Terran
I could write you 10 essays on why the other classes are absolutely ridiculous in the face of Terran though, and in fact TheDwrf has already basically done that with enough evidence that you can't provide for your own argument.
There really is no question to it..and it's also clear that Terran's late-game issues are inherent simply in the way the race's mechanics work, such as unit rallying from one far-away location and bad late-game unit synergy.
You have 2 choices: 1, either revamp the race which can only be done in LotV, or 2, try to make their mid-game stronger so that they come out stronger in the late-game, which is exactly what Blizzard intends to do with this patch, and which David Kim has stated was their goal. In that case, he admits you simply can't tweak a thing or two to directly make Terran late game stronger, due to the way the race simply is atm.
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
On July 23 2014 06:35 Deathstar42 wrote: i dont understand how no one has mentioned how the widow mine change will affect zvt its already insanely strong in that match up
They actually got nerfed so hard that I stopped using them in the matchup in favour of hellbat/banshee. Their weak AoE is the core cause of Terran difficulty in TvZ at the moment. Terran's only other AoE option is the tank, which is worthless in the match-up thanks to the new super mutas (unless you're already way ahead, then it doesn't really matter).
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
Seriously? Avilo? You have to be kidding me. Tell me when he even qualifies for a premier tournament (even just NA-level premier would suffice), then maybe your examples will have a shred of relevance to what I was saying.
The difference between T and ZP is that for Terrans, Marines are doing most of the damage. All the other units there are to support them.
Z and P also spam a lot of Tier 1, but they're almost cannon fodder for the Muta, Colossus, Archons, etc. Or they're used to harass.
Example: A Marine gets healed by a Medivac faster than a Stalker can actually do damage to it.
The end result is that when Terran trades, it's only trading minerals (okay, MOSTLY only minerals). Sure you need STIM and upgrades and Medivacs. But upgrades are one-time costs. And if you can press B your medivacs should survive.
MY POINT IS:
If you then give Terran a really good gas sink... it could be kind of a problem.
Example: A Marine gets healed by a Medivac faster than a Stalker can actually do damage to it.
Not a good example cuz that is not the marines fault, its the stalkers fault with his blink+warpgate Edit: And ofcourse, the whole race as one. So my example is probably pretty bad to
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
As much as I love Avilo for trying mech, he is definitely not a top tier Korean like you say, and I think all balance patches are directed towards problems at the top tier (mostly Koreans). Funnily, Bbyong has now done mech/raven three times in the ProLeague semifinals, but arguably on a specific map where he only won the first time surprising the opponent AND had a hidden expansion.
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
Avilo doesn't play like normal people though, he turtles on way less bases than he should actually have at any given time and never actually attacks. And he doesn't play bio, either. With bio if you let up the pressure you will get crushed, even with the new mines, and ravens won't make up for it as they don't do shit vs mutas. And that isn't even mentioning their complete lack of viability in a bio army.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Terran is flawed? Now I've seen it all.
They're all flawed. But yes, designing an entire race's roster to be nothing but support units for their first, cheap, low tech military unit is pretty silly.
Why?
Because it means the later tier units have to be weaker, which creates a situation where there is no incentive to tech up.
What you don't understand is that terrans t2 and t3 units are marines. They scales with upgrades and support. making them stronger. SC2 is an asymetrical game and a don't see why terrans can't have an army based on t1 units. The game isn't imbalanced because of marines. It never was.
Woa.... Marines never led to imbalances? 2010 + GomTvT? Blizzard just decided to not nerf marines back then, but to buff infestors, nerf tanks, buff queens, buff immortals (to hold marinebased 1-1-1s), nerf bunkers and raxes, stim... It's funny that you think the marine was never a problem when Terran had a ridiculously strong periode of domination with marine-based builds. Back then, they could have balanced differently. There was one solution to nerf all of the builds that caused imbalances, yet, they rather gimped everything else.
Guys the mine being more effective in the midgame (more cost effective) means Terrans late is more evened out because the opponents economy will be more damaged. This keeps in line with their asymmetric balance, it does make sense O_O @ the people saying it doesn't.
Also, get ready to micro everyone thats not Terran!
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Terran is flawed? Now I've seen it all.
They're all flawed. But yes, designing an entire race's roster to be nothing but support units for their first, cheap, low tech military unit is pretty silly.
Why?
Because it means the later tier units have to be weaker, which creates a situation where there is no incentive to tech up.
What you don't understand is that terrans t2 and t3 units are marines. They scales with upgrades and support. making them stronger. SC2 is an asymetrical game and a don't see why terrans can't have an army based on t1 units. The game isn't imbalanced because of marines. It never was.
Woa.... Marines never led to imbalances? 2010 + GomTvT? Blizzard just decided to not nerf marines back then, but to buff infestors, nerf tanks, buff queens, buff immortals (to hold marinebased 1-1-1s), nerf bunkers and raxes, stim... It's funny that you think the marine was never a problem when Terran had a ridiculously strong periode of domination with marine-based builds. Back then, they could have balanced differently. There was one solution to nerf all of the builds that caused imbalances, yet, they rather gimped everything else.
It's stupid to say that an aggression is marine based. It's like saying every protoss allin are zealot based but blink allin, that leave quite a lot of option. Hell, they even nerfed the pylone twice because of proxy gates zealots. WM got a buff against shield to deal with mass zealots too. I can tell you a shit tons of things that were nerfed that had absolutly no link with the marines. The blueflamme for exemple ? Remember Slayers_helliondrops ? or Marauders Hellions allin ? Much marines in these comp. And 2010 ? Wasn't that a bit beecause of the reaper too ? Reaper are so much marine like. That must be it. Yeah, Ghost too, remember how they mixed up so well when marines sniped BL and Ultra like it was nothing.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Terran is flawed? Now I've seen it all.
They're all flawed. But yes, designing an entire race's roster to be nothing but support units for their first, cheap, low tech military unit is pretty silly.
Why?
Because it means the later tier units have to be weaker, which creates a situation where there is no incentive to tech up.
What you don't understand is that terrans t2 and t3 units are marines. They scales with upgrades and support. making them stronger. SC2 is an asymetrical game and a don't see why terrans can't have an army based on t1 units. The game isn't imbalanced because of marines. It never was.
Woa.... Marines never led to imbalances? 2010 + GomTvT? Blizzard just decided to not nerf marines back then, but to buff infestors, nerf tanks, buff queens, buff immortals (to hold marinebased 1-1-1s), nerf bunkers and raxes, stim... It's funny that you think the marine was never a problem when Terran had a ridiculously strong periode of domination with marine-based builds. Back then, they could have balanced differently. There was one solution to nerf all of the builds that caused imbalances, yet, they rather gimped everything else.
Uh...
Infestor buff was for bio in general, tank nerfs were because of the map sizes back in 2010 (note how tanks have been buffed in HotS with the advent of larger maps), queen buffs were to deal with early hellions, immortal buffs were to deal with the tanks in 1-1-1, not marines... stim was because of map sizes (again; does no one remember close position Metalopolis?). Bunkers and rax nerfs were specifically to target bunker rushes.
Basically, you got bunker rushes right. That's about it regarding marines. Well done.
On July 23 2014 03:13 Lunareste wrote: buff tanks ;_;
just fucking buff tanks, blizzard.
TvT
Tanks were nerfed because zerg couldn't handle tank pressure on small maps back in 2010-2011. TvT was never really an issue. The worst that could happen in TvT is that it turns into tank/viking most of the time, but as long as drops remain as potent as they are (mainly because the current maps are enormous), a purely tank army will get pulled apart by a more mobile bio/medivac force. Tanks are strong but they can neither be everywhere at once or remade easily once they've gone down.
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
As much as I love Avilo for trying mech, he is definitely not a top tier Korean like you say, and I think all balance patches are directed towards problems at the top tier (mostly Koreans). Funnily, Bbyong has now done mech/raven three times in the ProLeague semifinals, but arguably on a specific map where he only won the first time surprising the opponent AND had a hidden expansion.
My argument was that Avilo is able to consistently pull off Raven transitions against all kinds of players, which was meant to include top tier Koreans.
To me personally, this is proof that Raven is severely underused.
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
Avilo doesn't play like normal people though, he turtles on way less bases than he should actually have at any given time and never actually attacks. And he doesn't play bio, either. With bio if you let up the pressure you will get crushed, even with the new mines, and ravens won't make up for it as they don't do shit vs mutas. And that isn't even mentioning their complete lack of viability in a bio army.
Avilo does play "like normal people" who play mech and he can play Bio Raven in TvZ pretty well.
What I'm trying to say here, is.... you seem to be making your arguments up out of thin air. You assume that Raven probably sucks with Bio, because no one does it (and theorycrafting maybe). Am I right?
ps: i'm playing bio raven in every TvZ and it makes the zergs whine in a large number of cases
Hmm I actually think it was mostly to adress the Voidray/Collosus composition. Over time in WOL, Muta/bling eventually became figured out, but when they buffed the Infestor, I don't think anyone realized that terran bio/tank was "imbalanced". vs zerg.
stim was because of map sizes (again; does no one remember close position Metalopolis?).
Many people do not remember this now, but Stim was actually one of those "noone asked for that"-nerf. Not saying it wasn't a good nerf back then, but it wasn't like there weren't any clear timings that were really hard to deal with (such as 1/1/1 was at one pont in time).
On July 23 2014 04:22 TheDwf wrote: [quote] PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Terran is flawed? Now I've seen it all.
They're all flawed. But yes, designing an entire race's roster to be nothing but support units for their first, cheap, low tech military unit is pretty silly.
Why?
Because it means the later tier units have to be weaker, which creates a situation where there is no incentive to tech up.
What you don't understand is that terrans t2 and t3 units are marines. They scales with upgrades and support. making them stronger. SC2 is an asymetrical game and a don't see why terrans can't have an army based on t1 units. The game isn't imbalanced because of marines. It never was.
Woa.... Marines never led to imbalances? 2010 + GomTvT? Blizzard just decided to not nerf marines back then, but to buff infestors, nerf tanks, buff queens, buff immortals (to hold marinebased 1-1-1s), nerf bunkers and raxes, stim... It's funny that you think the marine was never a problem when Terran had a ridiculously strong periode of domination with marine-based builds. Back then, they could have balanced differently. There was one solution to nerf all of the builds that caused imbalances, yet, they rather gimped everything else.
It's stupid to say that an aggression is marine based. It's like saying every protoss allin are zealot based but blink allin, that leave quite a lot of option. I can tell you a shit tons of things that were nerfed that had absolutly no link with the marines. The blueflamme for exemple ? Remember Slayers_helliondrops ? or Marauders Hellions allin ? Much marines in these comp.
Then I guess blizzard was wrong nerfing the infestor just because it was the core unit when zerg was too strong. Because "it is stupid to say those builds were infestorbased" for whatever reason.
Yei, you found other builds that were also used and nerfed. Which invalidates my point that they could have left rax/bunker/stim and a thousand other things that were nerfed because of marinebased plays in which way? (Not to mention that there also were marine/hellion pushes etc)
On July 23 2014 05:01 Squat wrote: [quote] Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also !@#$%^&* up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Terran is flawed? Now I've seen it all.
They're all flawed. But yes, designing an entire race's roster to be nothing but support units for their first, cheap, low tech military unit is pretty silly.
Why?
Because it means the later tier units have to be weaker, which creates a situation where there is no incentive to tech up.
What you don't understand is that terrans t2 and t3 units are marines. They scales with upgrades and support. making them stronger. SC2 is an asymetrical game and a don't see why terrans can't have an army based on t1 units. The game isn't imbalanced because of marines. It never was.
Woa.... Marines never led to imbalances? 2010 + GomTvT? Blizzard just decided to not nerf marines back then, but to buff infestors, nerf tanks, buff queens, buff immortals (to hold marinebased 1-1-1s), nerf bunkers and raxes, stim... It's funny that you think the marine was never a problem when Terran had a ridiculously strong periode of domination with marine-based builds. Back then, they could have balanced differently. There was one solution to nerf all of the builds that caused imbalances, yet, they rather gimped everything else.
It's stupid to say that an aggression is marine based. It's like saying every protoss allin are zealot based but blink allin, that leave quite a lot of option. I can tell you a !@#$%^&* tons of things that were nerfed that had absolutly no link with the marines. The blueflamme for exemple ? Remember Slayers_helliondrops ? or Marauders Hellions allin ? Much marines in these comp.
Then I guess blizzard was wrong nerfing the infestor just because it was the core unit when zerg was too strong. Because "it is stupid to say those builds were infestorbased" for whatever reason.
Yei, you found other builds that were also used and nerfed. Which invalidates my point that they could have left rax/bunker/stim and a thousand other things that were nerfed because of marinebased plays in which way? (Not to mention that there also were marine/hellion pushes etc)
I don't think you can compare Marines to Infestors here. Marine is a core-unit and it didn't really "dominate" other terran units. For instance, it's not like anyone said thad they would never go Hellions along with tanks as Marines were better along with tanks. So a strong Marine wasn't something which made other terran compositons nonviable.
Instead, a buff to the Infestor in early 2011 accomplished several things; - More diversity in all mathups (a Marine nerf wouldn't have succeded in doing that) - Better balance in both ZvP and TvZ (a Marine nerf would only have helped in nerfing TvZ).
And besides that, I am not really sure there are other obvious chances Blizzard made due to the impact of the Marine in the mid/late game. Bunker changes, 1/1/1 and Stim research time were only related to the early game and if Marines were fine in the mid/late game - but some Marines timings too strong in the early game - then it made sense for Blizzard to adress those issues on a seperate basis rather than making a general Marine nerf.
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
As much as I love Avilo for trying mech, he is definitely not a top tier Korean like you say, and I think all balance patches are directed towards problems at the top tier (mostly Koreans). Funnily, Bbyong has now done mech/raven three times in the ProLeague semifinals, but arguably on a specific map where he only won the first time surprising the opponent AND had a hidden expansion.
My argument was that Avilo is able to consistently pull off Raven transitions against all kinds of players, which was meant to include top tier Koreans.
To me personally, this is proof that Raven is severely underused.
I watch Avilo's stream. He doesn't generally play against the Koreans (he's honestly not at that level of skill). On the once-in-a-blue-moon occasion he does face one, he loses.
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
Avilo doesn't play like normal people though, he turtles on way less bases than he should actually have at any given time and never actually attacks. And he doesn't play bio, either. With bio if you let up the pressure you will get crushed, even with the new mines, and ravens won't make up for it as they don't do shit vs mutas. And that isn't even mentioning their complete lack of viability in a bio army.
Avilo does play "like normal people" who play mech and he can play Bio Raven in TvZ pretty well.
What I'm trying to say here, is.... you seem to be making your arguments up out of thin air. You assume that Raven probably sucks with Bio, because no one does it (and theorycrafting maybe). Am I right?
ps: i'm playing bio raven in every TvZ and it makes the zergs whine in a large number of cases
On July 23 2014 04:22 TheDwf wrote: [quote] PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Terran is flawed? Now I've seen it all.
They're all flawed. But yes, designing an entire race's roster to be nothing but support units for their first, cheap, low tech military unit is pretty silly.
Why?
Because it means the later tier units have to be weaker, which creates a situation where there is no incentive to tech up.
What you don't understand is that terrans t2 and t3 units are marines. They scales with upgrades and support. making them stronger. SC2 is an asymetrical game and a don't see why terrans can't have an army based on t1 units. The game isn't imbalanced because of marines. It never was.
Woa.... Marines never led to imbalances? 2010 + GomTvT? Blizzard just decided to not nerf marines back then, but to buff infestors, nerf tanks, buff queens, buff immortals (to hold marinebased 1-1-1s), nerf bunkers and raxes, stim... It's funny that you think the marine was never a problem when Terran had a ridiculously strong periode of domination with marine-based builds. Back then, they could have balanced differently. There was one solution to nerf all of the builds that caused imbalances, yet, they rather gimped everything else.
Uh...
Infestor buff was for bio in general, tank nerfs were because of the map sizes back in 2010 (note how tanks have been buffed in HotS with the advent of larger maps), queen buffs were to deal with early hellions, immortal buffs were to deal with the tanks in 1-1-1, not marines... stim was because of map sizes (again; does no one remember close position Metalopolis?). Bunkers and rax nerfs were specifically to target bunker rushes.
Basically, you got bunker rushes right. That's about it regarding marines. Well done.
The point is, that it doesnt matter if you nerf the marine or buff the immortal for tanks to deal with 1-1-1. In either case, you nerf 1-1-1. In either case, you nerf a marinebased build (that usually included 2-3raxes).
Those mapsize argumentations are extreme hindsight... we played the game on those maps and not on others.
Quenn buff was to somewhat cite DK to make it easier for zerg to break the hellion contains to get into a better posiion against follow up aggression. Guess what that follow up aggression usually was? Marine+something. You know how else they could have made those pushes weaker? By making them weaker...
And so on and so on. Many of the things Terrans did in 2010-11 only were broken because they made it too hard to hold follow up bio play, against which you need(ed) very severe precautions.
The point is, that it doesnt matter if you nerf the marine or buff the immortal for tanks to deal with 1-1-1. In either case, you nerf 1-1-1. In either case, you nerf a marinebased build (that usually included 2-3raxes).
I wrote about this in a post in the last page, but it does matter. A general Marine nerf would hurt both terran 1/1/1 as well as late game terran.
The latter wasn't deemed desireable back then.
Quenn buff was to somewhat cite DK to make it easier for zerg to break the hellion contains to get into a better posiion against follow up aggression
So I don't think this is a fair statement. TvZ early game was back then roughly as unfair as TvP early game is now. One race has all the options and the other race is forced to defend. As I remember it, you could do one of 3 builds as terran and it was quite difficult for zerg (with slower ovies) to guess which option the terran did:
- 4 hellions into doubleexpand while keeping the zerg on 2 bases. As zerg you could pressure this, but you had to prepare for it blindly since you couldn't scout and react. - 2base Marine/medivac follow up - A Maurauder/hellion allin/timing
A nerf to the Marine here wouldn't really change anything about the early game assymetry. It would still be terran with all the options. But in mid and later game, zerg would be in a better position (which wasn't really deemed desireable back then).
Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
I like Avilo, and I think his style is pretty neat, but I wouldn't go so far as to say he can pull off the transition against anyone. If he could, we would be seeing him in WCS by now Of the games I've seen him lose, it's people who harass him and keep him from getting to his ultimate Raven army. He seems to fall apart to harass from top players.
I don't know if that's more because his style is flawed or because his mechanics aren't solid enough to beat top players, but I would bet it's more of the former. If it actually worked, I can bet we would see Maru, or Taeja, or at least MKP whip it out from time to time.
The Raven is underused because they are only useful when in high numbers and there is no viable transition into mass Raven. It only works when you have an advantage, or when your opponent screws up.
I'd be curious to know what level you're playing at where bio+raven works, and if you are mid/high masters or better, I would like to see replays. Would be interesting.
I hate mines as they are. They kill units twice their cost in 1 shot and now are being buffed again without any thoughts on nerfing another aspect of their damage.
They will still 1 shot a clump of probes but will take 2 shots to kill a clump of scvs.
They will still 1 shot stalkers, oracles etc but not banshees.
They will still do bonus aoe damage to shields and now have even more aoe.
I don't mind blizz making life easier on terran with the thor change or nerfing toss with timewarp nerf (so long as it stays 15+ seconds) but change mines so they do not decide games with 1 shot plz, it is not a good way to determine a better player.
I just got back into SC2 and playeyed 300+ games as Terran in the past 2 months to finish off my 1k wins with all races portrait but this just took the wind out of my sails.
I have always had huge respect for blizzard but if they are going to give in to all the terran QQ and ruin this amazing game, im gone. I will watch and hope SC2 recovers but for the 2nd time in 3 years I am fearful of giving up on SC2.
This widow mine buff in TvP will be soooo annoying, and we can officially declare colossi-less openings dead. The rest is fine I guess, though with 10 seconds time warp + mandatory colossi openings, I can see scv pulls coming back with a vengeance -I'm pretty sure TvP is going to be T favored, even by little, in the next few months before P adapt.
On July 23 2014 02:57 DinoMight wrote: Awesome, a buff to the most annoying unit in the game. Honestly I don't think it will change too much. Templar openings are dead anyway. Hopefully they leave the game alone long enough for people to adapt this time...
I disagree, Dts are definitely the most annoying unit in the game
Voidrays, Oracles, MSC, Tempest are the most annoying in my opinion.
The point is, that it doesnt matter if you nerf the marine or buff the immortal for tanks to deal with 1-1-1. In either case, you nerf 1-1-1. In either case, you nerf a marinebased build (that usually included 2-3raxes).
I wrote about this in a post in the last page, but it does matter. A general Marine nerf would hurt both terran 1/1/1 as well as late game terran.
Quenn buff was to somewhat cite DK to make it easier for zerg to break the hellion contains to get into a better posiion against follow up aggression
So I don't think this is a fair statement. TvZ early game was back then roughly as unfair as TvP early game is now. One race has all the options and the other race is forced to defend. As I remember it, you could do one of 3 builds as terran and it was quite difficult for zerg (with slower ovies) to guess which option the terran did:
- 4 hellions into doubleexpand while keeping the zerg on 2 bases. As zerg you could pressure this, but you had to prepare for it blindly since you couldn't scout and react. - 2base Marine/medivac follow up - A Maurauder/hellion allin/timing
A nerf to the Marine here wouldn't really change anything about the early game assymetry. It would still be terran with all the options. But in mid and later game, zerg would be in a better position (which wasn't really deemed desireable back then).
Would it? Wouldnt some of those options just not be strong options anymore? If the marine/tank, marine/medivac, marine/hellion all were weaker there, Terran would lose quite an amount of options. In general, I think it is quite desireable to spread your combat power over various units in terms of gamedesign. Since marines were the core of many armies, it would have made sense to nerf them and in case of that being an overnerf to terran in certain situations (like lategame), buff the other units that are part of those Terran compositions. I never understood the Zergs that whined about mines back in the days. You're up against an opponent with 7-10barracks and 1-2factories. And you feel the 5-10 factory units are what is killing your 150supply army, seriously?
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
If you think "tier 1" units should not be usable or useful in late game situations, you should play another RTS game.
Terran has a flawed late game due to units, but from a fundamental standpoint it is not flawed. It is the most "vanilla RTS style" race in SC2.
People complaining about stim... I feel like it's 2010 again.
I never said they shouldn't be usable, I said they shouldn't be the CORE unit of an entire army for the entire duration of a game for 50 mineral outlay. Protoss can't function on mostly Zealots once it gets to late game and Zerg can't focus on mostly Zerglings except for harassment. That's their function at late game, they harass economy as well as help support the beefier tech army. An early game unit should not be able to effectively maul through pretty much everything else thrown at it with the support of other units, they should go from useful early game defence/offence to a support role for the beefier tech units. What's the point in having more expensive higher tech units if they're just going to be overshadowed by the very first unit you can produce in the game that's super cheap?
Please play a TvP going mainly Marines and then report back on how you will dealt with blink Stalkers all in or a 2 base Colossi timing. What's that? You lost? Not surprised.
Would it? Wouldnt some of those options just not be strong options anymore? If the marine/tank, marine/medivac, marine/hellion all were weaker there, Terran would lose quite an amount of options.
Well, if you nerf the DPS of Marines by around 20%, bio play would probably be useless in mid/late game and Zerg could focus all their ressources on just defending a Marauder/hellion all in, so in that regard zerg would be better early game.
A smaller nerf of like 5% less DPS probably wouldn't be that signifciant for the Marine/Medivac follow up. As I remember it, something like a reactor Hellion into Tank/marine push wasn't very common. I think if you wanted to go for aggression you didn't go for Tanks.
When the Boxer-build became popular, you could argue that Blizzard had two choices;
1) Blue flame harass was already very dominant in all matchups and created unforgiveable situations. 2) A nerf to the Hellion didn't have a big impact on Mech's core cost efficiency. But a nerf to the Marine would be a much bigger hit to the efficiency of bio play in the later game which wasn't needed.
Would it? Wouldnt some of those options just not be strong options anymore? If the marine/tank, marine/medivac, marine/hellion all were weaker there, Terran would lose quite an amount of options.
Hmm I mean if we you make like a big Marine nerf of 20% less DPS, bio play would probably be useless in mid/late game and Zerg could focus all their ressources on just defending a Marauder/hellion all in.
A smaller nerf of like 5% less DPS probably wouldn't be that signifciant for the Marine/Medivac follow up. As I remember it, something like a reactor Hellion into Tank/marine push wasn't very common. I think if you wanted to go for aggression you didn't go for Tanks.
2base tank/marine wasnt that common anymore, but still being used i think.
20% is way too big i think But I believe those 5-10% attackspeed changes are heavily underrated. They helped tanks a lot vs SHs and the hydralisk buff does work every ZvP. And they are not drastically changing builds, just their winpercentages. Even the mine nerf and upcoming buff kind of have "only" this statistical effect that doesnt really change how the unit and its timings work, but rather just make Terrans win/lose more combats that they'd try to take regardless of the actual strenght of the mine.
By the way, I seem to remember TvZ being quite balanced when the mine patch came, with T slightly edging but nothing shocking since Z were adapting and had got the overlord speed buff. I really wonder what TvZ will look like with this + all the buffs, albeit little (tanks, hellbats) that T got during this time. Time will tell but I REALLY fear they're overdoing it.
And Time Warp nerf is actually huge. I expect P to still be very good at the highest levels, but P will definitely get considerably slowed down (I still think Z will get hurt the more by this patch since they already did ok in PvZ and will have to adapt in ZvT).
Just when terran is starting to win more, DK messes up stuff again.
Templar openings are hardly used atm, with WM buff will be nearly non-existent. Really bad decision , making the game more 1 dimensional. Thor buff is ok, even still, why cant terran player micro it ? Can I have my Collossi auto attack armies instead of buildings ? lol
Kespa pros have been saying for a long time - LEAVE THE GAME ALONE FOR 6 MONTHS TO DEVELOP NEW STRATS.
Honestly I can't complain about the widow mine revert vs zerg. I mean, zerg's were just a-moving mass banes and flying mutalisks around with basically 0 fear of mines, allowing them to take fights very very easily and mass that huge flock of muta. PvT is still an issue though, terrans basically have stronger all in now.
On July 23 2014 09:00 fmod wrote: From a zerg point of view, im dissapointed. I don't like widow mines and playing against them, so much worse than spider mines. Bad move blizzard.
best part about playing in the gold league is I feel like balance patches don't really affect me. whether my race is under/overpowered, i'm too bad to really notice and there's always room for improvement on my part.
On July 23 2014 07:24 Big J wrote: The point is, that it doesnt matter if you nerf the marine or buff the immortal for tanks to deal with 1-1-1. In either case, you nerf 1-1-1. In either case, you nerf a marinebased build (that usually included 2-3raxes).
Nerfing the marine would nerf Terran across the board, which is ridiculous, as the only issue was 1-1-1. The siege tank was the backbone that made 1-1-1 so strong, not the marine. This is why 1-1-1 broke with the immortal buff; Protoss could more reliably shut down the tanks, rendering the all-in worthless.
On July 23 2014 07:24 Big J wrote: Those mapsize argumentations are extreme hindsight... we played the game on those maps and not on others.
Yes, we played the games on those maps, and that's why we saw the respective nerfs. It's also why we saw siege tank buffs with the new, larger maps. What part of that are you not understanding? Back when you had a 20 second rush distance to your opponent, stim timings were too strong, so stim research time was nerfed accordingly to delay the timing. The game is balanced according to the current state of the game + ladder pool; one of the big community suggestions to buff Terran this time around was to revert the stim research time nerf, specifically because the rush distances have changed since then. Blizzard disregarded that one in favour of reverting the WM nerf, but still.
On July 23 2014 07:24 Big J wrote: Quenn buff was to somewhat cite DK to make it easier for zerg to break the hellion contains to get into a better posiion against follow up aggression. Guess what that follow up aggression usually was? Marine+something. You know how else they could have made those pushes weaker? By making them weaker...
You've had two people correct you on this already now, but you still keep saying this nonsense. The queen was buffed to deal with early hellion pressure, which was too strong. It was too strong because Terran could do literally anything behind it and the Zerg was stuck on 2 bases. This had absolutely nothing to do with marines; Terran being up 3 bases to 2 vs a Zerg is a practically unwinnable situation for Z, regardless of what the follow-up timing is.
On July 23 2014 07:24 Big J wrote: And so on and so on. Many of the things Terrans did in 2010-11 only were broken because they made it too hard to hold follow up bio play, against which you need(ed) very severe precautions.
They made it too hard to hold ANY follow-up play, not just bio, as the non-Terran was always on the backfoot. Terran is facing the same issue now, hence the buffs.
If you actually think marines are too good, why don't you play Terran and mass marines? See how far you get.
I hate widow mine being so volatile, and it is just insane how short every engagement is and how fast it can swing the momentum if there is a good widow mine shot
On July 23 2014 09:08 Popkiller wrote: best part about playing in the gold league is I feel like balance patches don't really affect me. whether my race is under/overpowered, i'm too bad to really notice and there's always room for improvement on my part.
Well what you say is actually true for everyone except maybe top KR players, but most people are mistaken and think they're good enough to be affected by balance patches (me the first !).
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
As much as I love Avilo for trying mech, he is definitely not a top tier Korean like you say, and I think all balance patches are directed towards problems at the top tier (mostly Koreans). Funnily, Bbyong has now done mech/raven three times in the ProLeague semifinals, but arguably on a specific map where he only won the first time surprising the opponent AND had a hidden expansion.
My argument was that Avilo is able to consistently pull off Raven transitions against all kinds of players, which was meant to include top tier Koreans.
To me personally, this is proof that Raven is severely underused.
I watch Avilo's stream. He doesn't generally play against the Koreans (he's honestly not at that level of skill). On the once-in-a-blue-moon occasion he does face one, he loses.
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
Avilo doesn't play like normal people though, he turtles on way less bases than he should actually have at any given time and never actually attacks. And he doesn't play bio, either. With bio if you let up the pressure you will get crushed, even with the new mines, and ravens won't make up for it as they don't do shit vs mutas. And that isn't even mentioning their complete lack of viability in a bio army.
Avilo does play "like normal people" who play mech and he can play Bio Raven in TvZ pretty well.
What I'm trying to say here, is.... you seem to be making your arguments up out of thin air. You assume that Raven probably sucks with Bio, because no one does it (and theorycrafting maybe). Am I right?
ps: i'm playing bio raven in every TvZ and it makes the zergs whine in a large number of cases
I can't wait to see your debut in WCS Challenger.
Of course Avilo loses against most top tier players, but it still looks like he'd have a really great chance at pulling off a Raven transition. And sometimes he does. And in superlategame he actually stands a great fight against Korean top tier Terrans...
So judging from this, I believe that a great player could regularly pull off a Raven transition in top tier matches. Your counter-argument is "but Avilo loses to top tier Koreans".
Let me try to sum up your opinion. Koreans don't play Raven, because there's no chances to transition? Is that what you're saying?
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
As much as I love Avilo for trying mech, he is definitely not a top tier Korean like you say, and I think all balance patches are directed towards problems at the top tier (mostly Koreans). Funnily, Bbyong has now done mech/raven three times in the ProLeague semifinals, but arguably on a specific map where he only won the first time surprising the opponent AND had a hidden expansion.
My argument was that Avilo is able to consistently pull off Raven transitions against all kinds of players, which was meant to include top tier Koreans.
To me personally, this is proof that Raven is severely underused.
I watch Avilo's stream. He doesn't generally play against the Koreans (he's honestly not at that level of skill). On the once-in-a-blue-moon occasion he does face one, he loses.
On July 23 2014 07:05 beg wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:47 PinheadXXXXXX wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:37 beg wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:31 iamcaustic wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
Avilo doesn't play like normal people though, he turtles on way less bases than he should actually have at any given time and never actually attacks. And he doesn't play bio, either. With bio if you let up the pressure you will get crushed, even with the new mines, and ravens won't make up for it as they don't do shit vs mutas. And that isn't even mentioning their complete lack of viability in a bio army.
Avilo does play "like normal people" who play mech and he can play Bio Raven in TvZ pretty well.
What I'm trying to say here, is.... you seem to be making your arguments up out of thin air. You assume that Raven probably sucks with Bio, because no one does it (and theorycrafting maybe). Am I right?
ps: i'm playing bio raven in every TvZ and it makes the zergs whine in a large number of cases
I can't wait to see your debut in WCS Challenger.
Of course Avilo loses against most top tier players, but it still looks like he'd have a really great chance at pulling off a Raven transition. And sometimes he does. And in superlategame he actually stands a great fight against Korean top tier Terrans...
So judging from this, I believe that a great player could regularly pull off a Raven transition in top tier matches. Your counter-argument is "but Avilo loses to top tier Koreans".
Let me try to sum up your opinion. Koreans don't play Raven, because there's no chances to transition? Is that what you're saying?
If you play 100% of your game with raven ultra late game, don't you think even a midgm NA would compete with the top of korean terran ? I do. Top korean don't have as much experience in the ultra late game as avilo do because he do that every fucking games and koreans terran must have played that what, 10 times a month at best?
"we feel that both the strength of Protoss and weakness of Terran in the highest level tournaments has continued a bit too long and we’d like to act with a bigger set of changes this time around."
Let the protoss tears flow, while I bath in glory.
On July 23 2014 09:08 Popkiller wrote: best part about playing in the gold league is I feel like balance patches don't really affect me. whether my race is under/overpowered, i'm too bad to really notice and there's always room for improvement on my part.
Well what you say is actually true for everyone except maybe top KR players, but most people are mistaken and think they're good enough to be affected by balance patches (me the first !).
This drivel needs to die. It has no backing in reality and is just a senseless way for people to kill balance discussion without actually having to refute any arguments. Its almost as bad as "Sample size too small!" (Unfailingly used by people who don't even know what the statistical definition of a sample is...)
Lower skill players are more affected by balance than professional players by any quantitative measure. This is true for two major reasons: First, the lower skill player-base is many, many, orders of magnitude larger, therefore even the smallest alterations in balance have statistically significant outcomes. Secondly, as there are many more lower skill players, the average skill difference is much smaller. This is further compounded by the matchmaking system which attempts to generate even matchups. Even matchups are far more likely to have their outcome altered by balance than a RO8 taeja vs foreigner stomp.
If you accept the above two points, is impossible to make a coherent argument that balance patches do not affect lower level players. If you want empirical proof, ladder distribution statistics are far more volatile than high-level win rates.
In fact, the idea that a patch exclusively affects high level play was contradicted in the very post that this thread is discussing! The Thor patch is expected to have a marginal affect on pros, but alter low level play.
It is fair to say a few things regarding low skill players and skill, namely that balance at low skill levels should not be a priority, and that spending a few hours practicing will improve your game-play far more than whining on tl.
It is not fair, or even logically coherent, to say that low skill players are somehow immune to balance patches. If marine damage was doubled overnight, would low level players be unaffected because they should just play better?
P.S. Nothing makes me laugh harder than when someone claims "sample size too small" when discussing the entire population of games in a tournament or time period.
Well, it does affect you in the end, but far less more than the horrible mechanics the overwhelming majority of players have, including me ofc. So no, I'm pretty adamant this statement holds a lot of truth in it.
By the way, the skill gap between two lower players may be narrower, but how easy it is to increase your skill at this level makes it irrelevant.
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
As much as I love Avilo for trying mech, he is definitely not a top tier Korean like you say, and I think all balance patches are directed towards problems at the top tier (mostly Koreans). Funnily, Bbyong has now done mech/raven three times in the ProLeague semifinals, but arguably on a specific map where he only won the first time surprising the opponent AND had a hidden expansion.
My argument was that Avilo is able to consistently pull off Raven transitions against all kinds of players, which was meant to include top tier Koreans.
To me personally, this is proof that Raven is severely underused.
I watch Avilo's stream. He doesn't generally play against the Koreans (he's honestly not at that level of skill). On the once-in-a-blue-moon occasion he does face one, he loses.
On July 23 2014 07:05 beg wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:47 PinheadXXXXXX wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:37 beg wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:31 iamcaustic wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
Avilo doesn't play like normal people though, he turtles on way less bases than he should actually have at any given time and never actually attacks. And he doesn't play bio, either. With bio if you let up the pressure you will get crushed, even with the new mines, and ravens won't make up for it as they don't do shit vs mutas. And that isn't even mentioning their complete lack of viability in a bio army.
Avilo does play "like normal people" who play mech and he can play Bio Raven in TvZ pretty well.
What I'm trying to say here, is.... you seem to be making your arguments up out of thin air. You assume that Raven probably sucks with Bio, because no one does it (and theorycrafting maybe). Am I right?
ps: i'm playing bio raven in every TvZ and it makes the zergs whine in a large number of cases
I can't wait to see your debut in WCS Challenger.
Of course Avilo loses against most top tier players, but it still looks like he'd have a really great chance at pulling off a Raven transition. And sometimes he does. And in superlategame he actually stands a great fight against Korean top tier Terrans...
So judging from this, I believe that a great player could regularly pull off a Raven transition in top tier matches. Your counter-argument is "but Avilo loses to top tier Koreans".
Let me try to sum up your opinion. Koreans don't play Raven, because there's no chances to transition? Is that what you're saying?
Doesn't even matter what my opinion is, yours is based entirely on speculation that has already been disproven by reality (bold emphasis mine). He also doesn't come close to competing with Korean top-tier Terrans. At best, he can take a lucky ladder game once in a blue moon against mid-tier Koreans.
Worse still is how he consistently fails to perform well with this style at a competitive level despite playing it all the time, against opponents who almost never face this style of play. In other words, the opponent's response isn't even optimal. This is just a general inevitability, as nobody at higher tiers plays the super late game mass-raven style on a regular basis. Usually when you buck the meta-game trend with a viable strategy, you can get a lot of free wins just by your opponent responding poorly. I honestly suspect this to be the only reason Avilo gets into GM in the first place, and also why he comes nowhere close to a professional level of play (hence his extremely early and embarassing drop outs in tournament qualifiers).
I hate to write these kinds of posts because it feels like I'm just bashing Avilo, but the real problem is people like you putting him on an unrealistic pedestal.
Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
I like Avilo, and I think his style is pretty neat, but I wouldn't go so far as to say he can pull off the transition against anyone. If he could, we would be seeing him in WCS by now Of the games I've seen him lose, it's people who harass him and keep him from getting to his ultimate Raven army. He seems to fall apart to harass from top players.
I don't know if that's more because his style is flawed or because his mechanics aren't solid enough to beat top players, but I would bet it's more of the former. If it actually worked, I can bet we would see Maru, or Taeja, or at least MKP whip it out from time to time.
The Raven is underused because they are only useful when in high numbers and there is no viable transition into mass Raven. It only works when you have an advantage, or when your opponent screws up.
I'd be curious to know what level you're playing at where bio+raven works, and if you are mid/high masters or better, I would like to see replays. Would be interesting.
GUYS, you know what? The only thing I said was "hey Terran, you should fucking use more Ravens". Ok, let's get over the "top tier Korean" stuff. Let's pretend I was just talking to the forum. Ravens are great and I feel Terrans should get them in lategame TvZ and TvT.
I mean, Avilo probably has >80% winrate in lategame and DK already talks Raven nerfs.
Bio Raven TvZ works into high GM. Avilo showed this numerous times. (I feel stupid using him all the time, but he's the only one doing this...). Also, don't underestimate his skill. He's about the level of a lower tier foreign pro gamer.
PS: My Bio Raven style is very different from Avilo's. I push the zerg with 6 Ravens if I can, "siege" closeby to a zerg base with a field of auto turrets and mines, and a lot of bio. It's pretty cool, trust me. If I had any skill at all, this would prolly work in GM too. I'm not mid+ master. Everytime I hit masters I usually stop playing for quite a while.
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
As much as I love Avilo for trying mech, he is definitely not a top tier Korean like you say, and I think all balance patches are directed towards problems at the top tier (mostly Koreans). Funnily, Bbyong has now done mech/raven three times in the ProLeague semifinals, but arguably on a specific map where he only won the first time surprising the opponent AND had a hidden expansion.
My argument was that Avilo is able to consistently pull off Raven transitions against all kinds of players, which was meant to include top tier Koreans.
To me personally, this is proof that Raven is severely underused.
I watch Avilo's stream. He doesn't generally play against the Koreans (he's honestly not at that level of skill). On the once-in-a-blue-moon occasion he does face one, he loses.
On July 23 2014 07:05 beg wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:47 PinheadXXXXXX wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:37 beg wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:31 iamcaustic wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
Avilo doesn't play like normal people though, he turtles on way less bases than he should actually have at any given time and never actually attacks. And he doesn't play bio, either. With bio if you let up the pressure you will get crushed, even with the new mines, and ravens won't make up for it as they don't do shit vs mutas. And that isn't even mentioning their complete lack of viability in a bio army.
Avilo does play "like normal people" who play mech and he can play Bio Raven in TvZ pretty well.
What I'm trying to say here, is.... you seem to be making your arguments up out of thin air. You assume that Raven probably sucks with Bio, because no one does it (and theorycrafting maybe). Am I right?
ps: i'm playing bio raven in every TvZ and it makes the zergs whine in a large number of cases
I can't wait to see your debut in WCS Challenger.
Of course Avilo loses against most top tier players, but it still looks like he'd have a really great chance at pulling off a Raven transition. And sometimes he does. And in superlategame he actually stands a great fight against Korean top tier Terrans...
So judging from this, I believe that a great player could regularly pull off a Raven transition in top tier matches. Your counter-argument is "but Avilo loses to top tier Koreans".
Let me try to sum up your opinion. Koreans don't play Raven, because there's no chances to transition? Is that what you're saying?
Doesn't even matter what my opinion is, yours is based entirely on speculation that has already been disproven by reality (bold emphasis mine). He also doesn't come close to competing with Korean top-tier Terrans. At best, he can take a lucky ladder game once in a blue moon against mid-tier Koreans.
Worse still is how he consistently fails to perform well with this style at a competitive level despite playing it all the time, against opponents who almost never face this style of play. In other words, the opponent's response isn't even optimal. This is just a general inevitability, as nobody at higher tiers plays the super late game mass-raven style on a regular basis. Usually when you buck the meta-game trend with a viable strategy, you can get a lot of free wins just by your opponent responding poorly. I honestly suspect this to be the only reason Avilo gets into GM in the first place, and also why he comes nowhere close to a professional level of play (hence his extremely early and embarassing drop outs in tournament qualifiers).
I hate to write these kinds of posts because it feels like I'm just bashing Avilo, but the real problem is people like you putting him on an unrealistic pedestal.
I'm sad I couldn't convince you in the slightest.
Here's another point: I could show you numerous top tier Korean games with Terrans going Mech, doing great until messing up by not transitioning to Raven. It's so tangible and easy to see, once you see an actual game. Anyway, I obviously cant be assed to search for the replays now.
If you dont trust me on that one, okay.
So you stick to your argument, "Koreans don't play it, so it's not viable in top tier"?
Obviously you won't be able to pull off a transition in every game. But the games where a transition seems reasonable are quite a few, IMHO.
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
As much as I love Avilo for trying mech, he is definitely not a top tier Korean like you say, and I think all balance patches are directed towards problems at the top tier (mostly Koreans). Funnily, Bbyong has now done mech/raven three times in the ProLeague semifinals, but arguably on a specific map where he only won the first time surprising the opponent AND had a hidden expansion.
My argument was that Avilo is able to consistently pull off Raven transitions against all kinds of players, which was meant to include top tier Koreans.
To me personally, this is proof that Raven is severely underused.
I watch Avilo's stream. He doesn't generally play against the Koreans (he's honestly not at that level of skill). On the once-in-a-blue-moon occasion he does face one, he loses.
On July 23 2014 07:05 beg wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:47 PinheadXXXXXX wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:37 beg wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:31 iamcaustic wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
Avilo doesn't play like normal people though, he turtles on way less bases than he should actually have at any given time and never actually attacks. And he doesn't play bio, either. With bio if you let up the pressure you will get crushed, even with the new mines, and ravens won't make up for it as they don't do shit vs mutas. And that isn't even mentioning their complete lack of viability in a bio army.
Avilo does play "like normal people" who play mech and he can play Bio Raven in TvZ pretty well.
What I'm trying to say here, is.... you seem to be making your arguments up out of thin air. You assume that Raven probably sucks with Bio, because no one does it (and theorycrafting maybe). Am I right?
ps: i'm playing bio raven in every TvZ and it makes the zergs whine in a large number of cases
I can't wait to see your debut in WCS Challenger.
Of course Avilo loses against most top tier players, but it still looks like he'd have a really great chance at pulling off a Raven transition. And sometimes he does. And in superlategame he actually stands a great fight against Korean top tier Terrans...
So judging from this, I believe that a great player could regularly pull off a Raven transition in top tier matches. Your counter-argument is "but Avilo loses to top tier Koreans".
Let me try to sum up your opinion. Koreans don't play Raven, because there's no chances to transition? Is that what you're saying?
Doesn't even matter what my opinion is, yours is based entirely on speculation that has already been disproven by reality (bold emphasis mine). He also doesn't come close to competing with Korean top-tier Terrans. At best, he can take a lucky ladder game once in a blue moon against mid-tier Koreans.
Worse still is how he consistently fails to perform well with this style at a competitive level despite playing it all the time, against opponents who almost never face this style of play. In other words, the opponent's response isn't even optimal. This is just a general inevitability, as nobody at higher tiers plays the super late game mass-raven style on a regular basis. Usually when you buck the meta-game trend with a viable strategy, you can get a lot of free wins just by your opponent responding poorly. I honestly suspect this to be the only reason Avilo gets into GM in the first place, and also why he comes nowhere close to a professional level of play (hence his extremely early and embarassing drop outs in tournament qualifiers).
I hate to write these kinds of posts because it feels like I'm just bashing Avilo, but the real problem is people like you putting him on an unrealistic pedestal.
I'm sad I couldn't convince you in the slightest.
Here's another point: I could show you numerous top tier Korean games with Terrans going Mech, doing great until messing up by not transitioning to Raven. It's so tangible and easy to see, once you see an actual game. Anyway, I obviously cant be assed to search for the replays now.
If you dont trust me on that one, okay.
So you stick to your argument, "Koreans don't play it, so it's not viable in top tier"?
Obviously you won't be able to pull off a transition in every game. But the games where a transition seems reasonable are quite a few, IMHO.
PS: "Terran has no AoE", trololol.
I-I c-can show you b-but huh c-can't search replay f-for you. I s-swear.
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
As much as I love Avilo for trying mech, he is definitely not a top tier Korean like you say, and I think all balance patches are directed towards problems at the top tier (mostly Koreans). Funnily, Bbyong has now done mech/raven three times in the ProLeague semifinals, but arguably on a specific map where he only won the first time surprising the opponent AND had a hidden expansion.
My argument was that Avilo is able to consistently pull off Raven transitions against all kinds of players, which was meant to include top tier Koreans.
To me personally, this is proof that Raven is severely underused.
I watch Avilo's stream. He doesn't generally play against the Koreans (he's honestly not at that level of skill). On the once-in-a-blue-moon occasion he does face one, he loses.
On July 23 2014 07:05 beg wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:47 PinheadXXXXXX wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:37 beg wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:31 iamcaustic wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
Avilo doesn't play like normal people though, he turtles on way less bases than he should actually have at any given time and never actually attacks. And he doesn't play bio, either. With bio if you let up the pressure you will get crushed, even with the new mines, and ravens won't make up for it as they don't do shit vs mutas. And that isn't even mentioning their complete lack of viability in a bio army.
Avilo does play "like normal people" who play mech and he can play Bio Raven in TvZ pretty well.
What I'm trying to say here, is.... you seem to be making your arguments up out of thin air. You assume that Raven probably sucks with Bio, because no one does it (and theorycrafting maybe). Am I right?
ps: i'm playing bio raven in every TvZ and it makes the zergs whine in a large number of cases
I can't wait to see your debut in WCS Challenger.
Of course Avilo loses against most top tier players, but it still looks like he'd have a really great chance at pulling off a Raven transition. And sometimes he does. And in superlategame he actually stands a great fight against Korean top tier Terrans...
So judging from this, I believe that a great player could regularly pull off a Raven transition in top tier matches. Your counter-argument is "but Avilo loses to top tier Koreans".
Let me try to sum up your opinion. Koreans don't play Raven, because there's no chances to transition? Is that what you're saying?
Doesn't even matter what my opinion is, yours is based entirely on speculation that has already been disproven by reality (bold emphasis mine). He also doesn't come close to competing with Korean top-tier Terrans. At best, he can take a lucky ladder game once in a blue moon against mid-tier Koreans.
Worse still is how he consistently fails to perform well with this style at a competitive level despite playing it all the time, against opponents who almost never face this style of play. In other words, the opponent's response isn't even optimal. This is just a general inevitability, as nobody at higher tiers plays the super late game mass-raven style on a regular basis. Usually when you buck the meta-game trend with a viable strategy, you can get a lot of free wins just by your opponent responding poorly. I honestly suspect this to be the only reason Avilo gets into GM in the first place, and also why he comes nowhere close to a professional level of play (hence his extremely early and embarassing drop outs in tournament qualifiers).
I hate to write these kinds of posts because it feels like I'm just bashing Avilo, but the real problem is people like you putting him on an unrealistic pedestal.
I'm sad I couldn't convince you in the slightest.
Here's another point: I could show you numerous top tier Korean games with Terrans going Mech, doing great until messing up by not transitioning to Raven. It's so tangible and easy to see, once you see an actual game. Anyway, I obviously cant be assed to search for the replays now.
If you dont trust me on that one, okay.
So you stick to your argument, "Koreans don't play it, so it's not viable in top tier"?
Obviously you won't be able to pull off a transition in every game. But the games where a transition seems reasonable are quite a few, IMHO.
PS: "Terran has no AoE", trololol.
I-I c-can show you b-but huh c-can't search replay f-for you. I s-swear.
I think I remember a Bbyong vs Dark game on Waystation that qualifies here. I could be wrong though.
Why is always this stupid try to balance the game around 1 damn unit per expa? The main problem is Photon Over, not Time Warp, the main buff could be done on Tank with some +X vs Shield instead the Widow Mine.
Lot of things better could be tried to diversify the options on every MU, but no, it is like "Fuck Terran, go Widow Mine or die hard", "Free Macro Brotoss, don't worry bro on this Expa", and finally "Go and defend mostly with Queens and Static Defence while getting free units later Zergs"
On July 23 2014 09:08 Popkiller wrote: best part about playing in the gold league is I feel like balance patches don't really affect me. whether my race is under/overpowered, i'm too bad to really notice and there's always room for improvement on my part.
Well what you say is actually true for everyone except maybe top KR players, but most people are mistaken and think they're good enough to be affected by balance patches (me the first !).
This drivel needs to die. It has no backing in reality and is just a senseless way for people to kill balance discussion without actually having to refute any arguments. Its almost as bad as "Sample size too small!" (Unfailingly used by people who don't even know what the statistical definition of a sample is...)
Lower skill players are more affected by balance than professional players by any quantitative measure. This is true for two major reasons: First, the lower skill player-base is many, many, orders of magnitude larger, therefore even the smallest alterations in balance have statistically significant outcomes. Secondly, as there are many more lower skill players, the average skill difference is much smaller. This is further compounded by the matchmaking system which attempts to generate even matchups. Even matchups are far more likely to have their outcome altered by balance than a RO8 taeja vs foreigner stomp.
If you accept the above two points, is impossible to make a coherent argument that balance patches do not affect lower level players. If you want empirical proof, ladder distribution statistics are far more volatile than high-level win rates.
In fact, the idea that a patch exclusively affects high level play was contradicted in the very post that this thread is discussing! The Thor patch is expected to have a marginal affect on pros, but alter low level play.
It is fair to say a few things regarding low skill players and skill, namely that balance at low skill levels should not be a priority, and that spending a few hours practicing will improve your game-play far more than whining on tl.
It is not fair, or even logically coherent, to say that low skill players are somehow immune to balance patches. If marine damage was doubled overnight, would low level players be unaffected because they should just play better?
P.S. Nothing makes me laugh harder than when someone claims "sample size too small" when discussing the entire population of games in a tournament or time period.
I'm not saying it doesn't affect my games, I'm just saying it doesn't affect my mindset.
If I lose to an equally-skilled Protoss or Zerg because Terran is underpowered, so what? At my level, better macro and mechanics alone would have been enough to beat them, regardless of balance.
So when I lose, the answer to "what could I have done differently?" isn't "Nothing, the game is imbalanced." The answer is simple: play more and improve my macro. It's the same answer it would have been if the game was 100% balanced.
I'm not gonna get worked up over the game's balance, I'll leave that for the pros who are actually trying to make a living from this and are competing at a level where "just get better" isn't always a good enough answer.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Umm no Terran who wants to win will be going marine heavy in the later stages of a TvP.. Its all about the marauder after a certain point, with some marines mixed in the fight the ridiculous tankiness that is the (all mineral) zealot (which gets a passive speed boost and charge ability without even the press of a button). Zealots have more dps than a stimmed marine, almost as much health as 3 marines (with CS), and come with a base armor. Lets not cast stones in a glass house about good all mineral units, shall we?
And I like how you brush of medivacs as just other units that happen to heal marines. Bio armies are completely useless without medivacs, play bio without them sometime and let me know how that goes for you. Medivacs are tier 3 units for a reason, and are not cheap either.
On July 23 2014 04:20 StasisField wrote: I still don't see the point in the Timewarp change. It is so vital in PvP engagements that this feels too drastic.
PvP is a mirror... Both sides have the MSC.
Protoss players have been using PvP as an excuse not to nerf stupid stuff for some time now. PO comes to mind. One might argue that if PvP is only fine because of borderline broken abilities on a hero unit that also fuck up the other MUs, there are some deeper issues, but w/e.
So you want Protoss to die to stim pushes every game? After watching Ryung vs Squirtle I definitely don't think PO "fucks up" other match-ups.
Protoss isn't the flawed race here, Terran is. I can't be the only one who finds it ridiculous that Terran get away with making the bulk of their army in cheap tier 1 units that then get a DPS + Speed boost at the press of one button + healing from other units.
Don't get me wrong, there are aspects of Protoss that are incredibly stupid (I'm looking at you Time Warp) but a race that is balanced entirely around a 50 mineral early game unit that does pretty much everything + cheap mine units that can decimate most things very cost effectively. Surely I can't be the only person in the world who thinks that's incredibly silly.
Terran is flawed? Now I've seen it all.
They're all flawed. But yes, designing an entire race's roster to be nothing but support units for their first, cheap, low tech military unit is pretty silly.
Terran has to be heavily reliant on their lower tier units for a reason..their production capabilities are by far the worst among all 3 races. Unlike Zerg Terran can not spawn entirely new army compositions on the fly, and unlike Toss Terran cannot chrono its buildings to spit new armies out very quickly. Also Toss units take more supply so they dont have to actually produce as much to max out (numbers/time wise, not cost). Thus in the later stages of the game Terran is still largely locked into using the same production facilities it has already been using, as transitioning to a different comp takes a long time and is very expensive.
If terran needed a buff in late game I sure hope they bring back Caduceus Reactor. The game then would be differentky fix late game for bio.
Now that I think about think about it when ppl say terran needs a late game unit im differently going to talk about this upgrade.Also I thought it was cool with the medi changing all colors when it healed .
Also im talking about the healing regeneration from hots beta
On July 23 2014 12:10 desertfrog817 wrote: If terran needed a buff in late game I sure hope they bring back Caduceus Reactor. The game then would be differentky fix late game for bio.
Now that I think about think about it when ppl say terran needs a late game unit im differently going to talk about this upgrade.Also I thought it was cool with the medi changing all colors when it healed .
Also im talking about the healing regeneration from hots beta
I'm wondering if this is going to make the passive / mech style playing terrans A LOT more difficult to kill, because of the widow mine buff, and thor AA prioritization changed....terrans that just sit and do nothing all game, and do the mass raven composition that avilo ( for example ) does, the widowmine buff is going to make any sort of attacking even less possible.....
I feel like this is going to make ZvT a lot more difficult vs the non standard T players imo....hopefully not though....Thoughts on this anyone...?
Not really the thread for it, but I'm wondering if it could be worth it to get a fast (or, you know, relatively fast) raven to kill the obs if it really turns out that nobody opens templar anymore
Is this really what terrans want? This basically means if you don't pull your probes in time against an early mine drop you will loose to one mine. And you might still loose if they send in a second medivac into the retreat path of your probes (haven't seen anyone do this since the beta). This doesn't seem like it addresses any balance concerns and will just give random wins to terran if they happen to land a lucky widow mine shot.
On July 23 2014 12:10 desertfrog817 wrote: If terran needed a buff in late game I sure hope they bring back Caduceus Reactor. The game then would be differentky fix late game for bio.
Now that I think about think about it when ppl say terran needs a late game unit im differently going to talk about this upgrade.Also I thought it was cool with the medi changing all colors when it healed .
Also im talking about the healing regeneration from hots beta
lol you mean the insta-win upgrade?
you obviously havent seen HT storm a bio army lol but yeah im just making a suggestion for late game even with this upgrade terran still had to split and so on.
On July 23 2014 12:10 desertfrog817 wrote: If terran needed a buff in late game I sure hope they bring back Caduceus Reactor. The game then would be differentky fix late game for bio.
Now that I think about think about it when ppl say terran needs a late game unit im differently going to talk about this upgrade.Also I thought it was cool with the medi changing all colors when it healed .
Also im talking about the healing regeneration from hots beta
lol you mean the insta-win upgrade?
you obviously havent seen HT storm a bio army lol but yeah im just making a suggestion for late game even with this upgrade terran still had to split and so on.
A high templar costs 50/150 and has to wait half a minute to cast a skillshot that does 80 damage over 4 seconds in a 1.5 radius and can be dodged. The proposed widow mine will cost 75/25 and does the same damage instantly over a larger radius. The only reason I can think why they will buff it like this is if they have an internal bet going to see if they can make a change so outrageous it will make Avilo stop crying.
I believe a lot of people dont really mind about the balance but they want to see mech play from time to time. That is where the 'buff tank please' come from (I think). Lets see if this buff will bring out mech or not. May be i will finally get to see flash in code S .
On July 23 2014 09:08 Popkiller wrote: best part about playing in the gold league is I feel like balance patches don't really affect me. whether my race is under/overpowered, i'm too bad to really notice and there's always room for improvement on my part.
Well what you say is actually true for everyone except maybe top KR players, but most people are mistaken and think they're good enough to be affected by balance patches (me the first !).
I don't understand the direction they are going. None of these changes affect anything in the current meta. Why can't they just take the correct direction and nerf Protoss where it needs to be nerfed, aka Photon Cannon and the Colossus. If you still want to correct win-rates in ZvT in the late game, remove the regeneration of the Mutalisk. This mine buff is only going to affect lower level players and make it so the games balances is even more luck oriented in professional play.
Lets take a closer look at these buffs for example. When does the Thor ever have a problem with Mutalisks? Only when it is an addition to bio/mine, so you are only double buffing two units vs Mutalisks when you could of just removed regeneration. Mech players stay near their bases until maxed because they need a large army to counter the ground army, not mutalisks, so they have the added affect of being protected with Thors/Missile Turrets.
The mine buff does nothing but create another luck aspect of ZvT like it did in early HOTS (when Terran had the highest winrate out of any race in the history of sc2 at 56%) and now they have a tank buff and hellbat buff behind this. When you look at it as a buff vs Protoss you are only buffing the early and middle game and doing nothing about the real problems, aka Photon Overcharge and Late game deathballs as Colossus out range the mine.
As for Time Warp, this is just a silly change that does nothing to change the actual spell. 90% of the damage of the spell is done within the first five seconds that it is thrown down and most end game battles never last more than 10 seconds in the first place, so it won't help. It will only help the retreating Protoss army, which rarely will a Protoss not have energy for a recall during a battle they know they might not win.
On July 23 2014 13:23 StaraCroft wrote: Is this really what terrans want? This basically means if you don't pull your probes in time against an early mine drop you will loose to one mine. And you might still loose if they send in a second medivac into the retreat path of your probes (haven't seen anyone do this since the beta). This doesn't seem like it addresses any balance concerns and will just give random wins to terran if they happen to land a lucky widow mine shot.
Yeah, lucky to find a protoss that has huge reaction times and does not move probes.
On July 23 2014 12:10 desertfrog817 wrote: If terran needed a buff in late game I sure hope they bring back Caduceus Reactor. The game then would be differentky fix late game for bio.
Now that I think about think about it when ppl say terran needs a late game unit im differently going to talk about this upgrade.Also I thought it was cool with the medi changing all colors when it healed .
Also im talking about the healing regeneration from hots beta
lol you mean the insta-win upgrade?
you obviously havent seen HT storm a bio army lol but yeah im just making a suggestion for late game even with this upgrade terran still had to split and so on.
A high templar costs 50/150 and has to wait half a minute to cast a skillshot that does 80 damage over 4 seconds in a 1.5 radius and can be dodged. The proposed widow mine will cost 75/25 and does the same damage instantly over a larger radius. The only reason I can think why they will buff it like this is if they have an internal bet going to see if they can make a change so outrageous it will make Avilo stop crying.
Yes it would do damage almost instant if u include burrowing claw but thing is WM realize on luck, that luck being it does more damage to the protoss side then to terran army. You dont ever see a HT storm a protoss army like WM does to a terran army which can also lead to gg at some times. WM are alright they help keep up withe pace in sc2 but late game things like broodlord late game against a wm were pretty good before the nerf, it might be different now but I doubt it. All in all terran does feel like it needs a late game buff, I still feel like the upgrade from hots beta Caduceus Reactor which allows medivac to heal faster would help terran late game.
Also I believe thats the whole reason why ppl watch avilo play lol j.k idk
On July 23 2014 13:23 StaraCroft wrote: Is this really what terrans want? This basically means if you don't pull your probes in time against an early mine drop you will loose to one mine. And you might still loose if they send in a second medivac into the retreat path of your probes (haven't seen anyone do this since the beta). This doesn't seem like it addresses any balance concerns and will just give random wins to terran if they happen to land a lucky widow mine shot.
Yeah, lucky to find a protoss that has huge reaction times and does not move probes.
You obviously haven't played against this in the beta. If you don't pull the probes before the mine gets dropped it is better to not move them at all because you will just guide the widow mine shot into all of your probes loosing you the game instantly. Of course it's possible to play against this, but a fraction of a second can make the difference between no units lost and 16 probes lost. It is extremely coinflippy.
On July 23 2014 07:24 Big J wrote: The point is, that it doesnt matter if you nerf the marine or buff the immortal for tanks to deal with 1-1-1. In either case, you nerf 1-1-1. In either case, you nerf a marinebased build (that usually included 2-3raxes).
Nerfing the marine would nerf Terran across the board, which is ridiculous, as the only issue was 1-1-1. The siege tank was the backbone that made 1-1-1 so strong, not the marine. This is why 1-1-1 broke with the immortal buff; Protoss could more reliably shut down the tanks, rendering the all-in worthless.
Mid 2011 Terran was too strong across the board. If it had broken a Terran matchup, you could have still buffed something else. Instead they strengthened the Immortal to counter tanks better and you really defend them for that? As if Immortals hadn't been strong enough vs tanks before.
On July 23 2014 07:24 Big J wrote: Those mapsize argumentations are extreme hindsight... we played the game on those maps and not on others.
Yes, we played the games on those maps, and that's why we saw the respective nerfs. It's also why we saw siege tank buffs with the new, larger maps. What part of that are you not understanding? Back when you had a 20 second rush distance to your opponent, stim timings were too strong, so stim research time was nerfed accordingly to delay the timing. The game is balanced according to the current state of the game + ladder pool; one of the big community suggestions to buff Terran this time around was to revert the stim research time nerf, specifically because the rush distances have changed since then. Blizzard disregarded that one in favour of reverting the WM nerf, but still.
EVERYTHING was balanced around those maps. You can argue in favor of buffing ANYTHING with the argumentation "Golly gush, Colossi were balanced with smaller maps in mind. Time for a buff, LAZOOOORRRRZZZ+++". It's a stupid argument and hindsight.
On July 23 2014 07:24 Big J wrote: Quenn buff was to somewhat cite DK to make it easier for zerg to break the hellion contains to get into a better posiion against follow up aggression. Guess what that follow up aggression usually was? Marine+something. You know how else they could have made those pushes weaker? By making them weaker...
You've had two people correct you on this already now, but you still keep saying this nonsense. The queen was buffed to deal with early hellion pressure, which was too strong. It was too strong because Terran could do literally anything behind it and the Zerg was stuck on 2 bases. This had absolutely nothing to do with marines; Terran being up 3 bases to 2 vs a Zerg is a practically unwinnable situation for Z, regardless of what the follow-up timing is.
And what do you mean with "Terran could do literally anything behind it"? I hope bio, because it's the only thing they were doing. Mech was hardly explored back then. And no, it was neither impossible to win with two-base muta builds nor impossible to take a third with roach expands. Theses builds all just had in common that they were still not good against one of the 5 or more 2base allins that a Terran could do back in the days, because you started your creepspread at nothing in the midgame.
On July 23 2014 07:24 Big J wrote: And so on and so on. Many of the things Terrans did in 2010-11 only were broken because they made it too hard to hold follow up bio play, against which you need(ed) very severe precautions.
They made it too hard to hold ANY follow-up play, not just bio, as the non-Terran was always on the backfoot. Terran is facing the same issue now, hence the buffs.
If you actually think marines are too good, why don't you play Terran and mass marines? See how far you get.
If you actually think that I'm arguing that Terran is broken, then please refrain from answering.
On July 23 2014 16:04 pmp10 wrote: That's surprising. Between Taeja winning IEM and terran rebound in code A I was sure that Blizzard would drop everything but the thor change.
The worst thing happened. As Flash noted in interview - don't change the game so often, leave it be. Now it looks like Terrans are rising again and BOOM, they need a buff. I wonder what that could do. I expect nerfing mine again. Well, why does this reminds me warp gate tech from Wings? ><
On July 23 2014 16:04 pmp10 wrote: That's surprising. Between Taeja winning IEM and terran rebound in code A I was sure that Blizzard would drop everything but the thor change.
Why would they drop needed mine changes for PVZ, just because 1 or 2 Terrans overseas is doing good? Teaja is just a godly player, does not mean Terran still has issues in TVZ and TVP. It's been 1 year since HOTS came out, Korean Zergs are perfectly fine with splitting vs old widow mines and playing more micro oriented instead of carelessly a moving banelings with out much splitting.
Muta cloud+speed overseer is what a lot of Koreans used to snipe off un protected widow mines back than, and it worked well before they nerfed the mine. Also Life back then was able to micro very well vs the old widow mine, it still does huge splash dmg to the Terran army.
Most Koreans agree that they should of left the Widow mine alone in the first place and let players adapt since it was a new expac, but low league community cried so much Blizzard just nerfed it. David Kim even said he regrets nerfing the widow mine.
On July 23 2014 16:04 pmp10 wrote: That's surprising. Between Taeja winning IEM and terran rebound in code A I was sure that Blizzard would drop everything but the thor change.
Why would they drop needed mine changes for PVZ, just because 1 or 2 Terrans overseas is doing good? Teaja is just a godly player, does not mean Terran still has issues in TVZ and TVP. It's been 1 year since HOTS came out, Korean Zergs are perfectly fine with splitting vs old widow mines and playing more micro oriented instead of carelessly a moving banelings with out much splitting.
Muta cloud+speed overseer is what a lot of Koreans used to snipe off un protected widow mines back than, and it worked well before they nerfed the mine. Also Life back then was able to micro very well vs the old widow mine, it still does huge splash dmg to the Terran army.
Most Koreans agree that they should of left the Widow mine alone in the first place and let players adapt since it was a new expac, but low league community cried so much Blizzard just nerfed it. David Kim even said he regrets nerfing the widow mine.
Well the problem is, that they are NOT returning to the old widow mine, you know? Remove the shield bonus damage and I bet that most of the P players will be angry, but they will accept that change.
Well if this is supposed to help TvP, its pretty disappointing, in fact its more of a TvZ patch tbh. Complete lack of vision and inspiration by Mr Kim on show here.
On July 23 2014 16:04 pmp10 wrote: That's surprising. Between Taeja winning IEM and terran rebound in code A I was sure that Blizzard would drop everything but the thor change.
Why would they drop needed mine changes for PVZ, just because 1 or 2 Terrans overseas is doing good? Teaja is just a godly player, does not mean Terran still has issues in TVZ and TVP. It's been 1 year since HOTS came out,
No - they would drop them because terran is doing better in GSL. That was the whole reason that 'poor terrans' movement got so much support.
On July 23 2014 16:13 LingBlingBling wrote: Korean Zergs are perfectly fine with splitting vs old widow mines and playing more micro oriented instead of carelessly a moving banelings with out much splitting.
Muta cloud+speed overseer is what a lot of Koreans used to snipe off un protected widow mines back than, and it worked well before they nerfed the mine. Also Life back then was able to micro very well vs the old widow mine, it still does huge splash dmg to the Terran army.
Most Koreans agree that they should of left the Widow mine alone in the first place and let players adapt since it was a new expac, but low league community cried so much Blizzard just nerfed it. David Kim even said he regrets nerfing the widow mine.
First of all one correction: mine was nerfed for the sake of variety. And it was a good idea since every TvZ devolved into the same parade-push eventually making viewers bored. The reason things ended badly balance-wise was due to Blizzards refusal to seriously buff other terran options (sounds familiar?).
On July 23 2014 13:23 StaraCroft wrote: Is this really what terrans want? This basically means if you don't pull your probes in time against an early mine drop you will loose to one mine. And you might still loose if they send in a second medivac into the retreat path of your probes (haven't seen anyone do this since the beta). This doesn't seem like it addresses any balance concerns and will just give random wins to terran if they happen to land a lucky widow mine shot.
Yeah, lucky to find a protoss that has huge reaction times and does not move probes.
You obviously haven't played against this in the beta. If you don't pull the probes before the mine gets dropped it is better to not move them at all because you will just guide the widow mine shot into all of your probes loosing you the game instantly. Of course it's possible to play against this, but a fraction of a second can make the difference between no units lost and 16 probes lost. It is extremely coinflippy.
Widow mines take 3 seconds to burrow and another 1.5 seconds to fire. If you cant react to widow mines in 4.5 seconds, then I really dont know what to say. Most widow mines get only 3-4 kills before they die anyways. On the other hand, the oracle...
And what do you mean with "Terran could do literally anything behind it"? I hope bio, because it's the only thing they were doing. Mech was hardly explored back then.
The problem wasn't that terran could go into a 2 base bio after a reactor hellion expand. Rather, the issue was that they could do that or for really greedy builds or some kind of 2 base allin (without Marines) such as double factory Reactor or Maurauder Hellion. And I guess Banshee's were quite strong at one point in time before Queen range buff as well.
Then ofc comes the fact that terran wasn't considered imba in the late-game. Broodlord/infestor was imbalanced lategame after the Ghost nerf, and I think most people probably was aware of that before the Queen nerf, but it was hard for zergs at pro level to consistently get there, so it wasn't this big topic. But nerfing Marines really wouldn't adress the early game issue very efficiently. A 5-10% DPS nerf would still make terran imbalanced in this phase of the game, but later game the matchup would be quite zerg favored.
On July 23 2014 16:04 pmp10 wrote: That's surprising. Between Taeja winning IEM and terran rebound in code A I was sure that Blizzard would drop everything but the thor change.
Why would they drop needed mine changes for PVZ, just because 1 or 2 Terrans overseas is doing good? Teaja is just a godly player, does not mean Terran still has issues in TVZ and TVP. It's been 1 year since HOTS came out, Korean Zergs are perfectly fine with splitting vs old widow mines and playing more micro oriented instead of carelessly a moving banelings with out much splitting.
Muta cloud+speed overseer is what a lot of Koreans used to snipe off un protected widow mines back than, and it worked well before they nerfed the mine. Also Life back then was able to micro very well vs the old widow mine, it still does huge splash dmg to the Terran army.
Most Koreans agree that they should of left the Widow mine alone in the first place and let players adapt since it was a new expac, but low league community cried so much Blizzard just nerfed it. David Kim even said he regrets nerfing the widow mine.
The problem for zerg is not that they are returning to the old mine but that they are returning to the old mine WITH hellbat and siege tank buffs.
On July 23 2014 13:23 StaraCroft wrote: Is this really what terrans want? This basically means if you don't pull your probes in time against an early mine drop you will loose to one mine. And you might still loose if they send in a second medivac into the retreat path of your probes (haven't seen anyone do this since the beta). This doesn't seem like it addresses any balance concerns and will just give random wins to terran if they happen to land a lucky widow mine shot.
Yeah, lucky to find a protoss that has huge reaction times and does not move probes.
You obviously haven't played against this in the beta. If you don't pull the probes before the mine gets dropped it is better to not move them at all because you will just guide the widow mine shot into all of your probes loosing you the game instantly. Of course it's possible to play against this, but a fraction of a second can make the difference between no units lost and 16 probes lost. It is extremely coinflippy.
Widow mines take 3 seconds to burrow and another 1.5 seconds to fire. If you cant react to widow mines in 4.5 seconds, then I really dont know what to say. Most widow mines get only 3-4 kills before they die anyways. On the other hand, the oracle...
A widow mine that got 3-4 kills before the patch will end the game after the patch. Just to make sure you realize this: One WM will kill every probe in the entire spash radius of 1.75 instantly, which is half a mineral line. I'm not saying it will be impossible to defend. I've played against this for months. I'm just saying it increases the punishment for making a mistake as protoss. It's making a binary unit even more binary. It will lead to some easy wins if P makes a mistake, and will change almost nothing if they don't.
On July 23 2014 13:23 StaraCroft wrote: Is this really what terrans want? This basically means if you don't pull your probes in time against an early mine drop you will loose to one mine. And you might still loose if they send in a second medivac into the retreat path of your probes (haven't seen anyone do this since the beta). This doesn't seem like it addresses any balance concerns and will just give random wins to terran if they happen to land a lucky widow mine shot.
Yeah, lucky to find a protoss that has huge reaction times and does not move probes.
You obviously haven't played against this in the beta. If you don't pull the probes before the mine gets dropped it is better to not move them at all because you will just guide the widow mine shot into all of your probes loosing you the game instantly. Of course it's possible to play against this, but a fraction of a second can make the difference between no units lost and 16 probes lost. It is extremely coinflippy.
Widow mines take 3 seconds to burrow and another 1.5 seconds to fire. If you cant react to widow mines in 4.5 seconds, then I really dont know what to say. Most widow mines get only 3-4 kills before they die anyways. On the other hand, the oracle...
A widow mine that got 3-4 kills before the patch will end the game after the patch. Just to make sure you realize this: One WM will kill every probe in the entire spash radius of 1.75 instantly, which is half a mineral line. I'm not saying it will be impossible to defend. I've played against this for months. I'm just saying it increases the punishment for making a mistake as protoss. It's making a binary unit even more binary. It will lead to some easy wins if P makes a mistake, and will change almost nothing if they don't.
Basically like the oracle so where is the problem?
On July 23 2014 13:23 StaraCroft wrote: Is this really what terrans want? This basically means if you don't pull your probes in time against an early mine drop you will loose to one mine. And you might still loose if they send in a second medivac into the retreat path of your probes (haven't seen anyone do this since the beta). This doesn't seem like it addresses any balance concerns and will just give random wins to terran if they happen to land a lucky widow mine shot.
Yeah, lucky to find a protoss that has huge reaction times and does not move probes.
You obviously haven't played against this in the beta. If you don't pull the probes before the mine gets dropped it is better to not move them at all because you will just guide the widow mine shot into all of your probes loosing you the game instantly. Of course it's possible to play against this, but a fraction of a second can make the difference between no units lost and 16 probes lost. It is extremely coinflippy.
Widow mines take 3 seconds to burrow and another 1.5 seconds to fire. If you cant react to widow mines in 4.5 seconds, then I really dont know what to say. Most widow mines get only 3-4 kills before they die anyways. On the other hand, the oracle...
A widow mine that got 3-4 kills before the patch will end the game after the patch. Just to make sure you realize this: One WM will kill every probe in the entire spash radius of 1.75 instantly, which is half a mineral line. I'm not saying it will be impossible to defend. I've played against this for months. I'm just saying it increases the punishment for making a mistake as protoss. It's making a binary unit even more binary. It will lead to some easy wins if P makes a mistake, and will change almost nothing if they don't.
Basically like the oracle so where is the problem?
Even Oracle is not so punishing as new mine(for maximizing the effect you have to target SCVs in fact(or larvae in zerg case ) and buffing Oracle is a stupid decision agreed across all races, so you are saying that you agree that buffing mine is a little bigger idiocy?
On July 23 2014 16:58 Loccstana wrote: Widow mines take 3 seconds to burrow and another 1.5 seconds to fire. If you cant react to widow mines in 4.5 seconds, then I really dont know what to say. Most widow mines get only 3-4 kills before they die anyways. On the other hand, the oracle...
It's not about reacting in 5 seconds. If you simply select all your probes and tell them to move to X destination the probes on the side of the minerals further away from the destination will have to enter the mine's activation area, move across the entire diameter of said aream and exit it at the far side in order to path to that destination. They can't do that in 4 seconds so the WM will fire at them. To avoid a probe massacre against a speed medivac boosting in from the fog of war you quite literally need to split your probes into 3 different control groups and tell them to move in three different directions in one second. A single straggler probe that does not escape fast enough will cause the mine to fire and splash them all to death, since they're bunched up. Even if you do this correctly you will still often lose half your probes when the WM targets the probe that just came out of your assimilator, since you couldn't give it orders while it was in there.
More importantly, the widow mine can do this even if your photon overcharge is active and you have an observer in place. PI can't kill a mine before it burrows and fires. You then have to repeat the ridiculous micro 3 seconds later when the medivac flies to your expansion and drops a mine there.
It's very similar to defending against a 4x blue flame hellion drop from WoL with only like 3 or 4 stalkers in place, 300 APM probe splitting or lose two thirds of them. The difference was in WoL you could block them with forcefields, against these mines there's nothing to do besides 300 APM split micro or lose unless you scouted the medivac incoming in advance. None of your units at that stage of the game can kill a mine before it burrows.
On July 23 2014 13:23 StaraCroft wrote: Is this really what terrans want? This basically means if you don't pull your probes in time against an early mine drop you will loose to one mine. And you might still loose if they send in a second medivac into the retreat path of your probes (haven't seen anyone do this since the beta). This doesn't seem like it addresses any balance concerns and will just give random wins to terran if they happen to land a lucky widow mine shot.
Yeah, lucky to find a protoss that has huge reaction times and does not move probes.
You obviously haven't played against this in the beta. If you don't pull the probes before the mine gets dropped it is better to not move them at all because you will just guide the widow mine shot into all of your probes loosing you the game instantly. Of course it's possible to play against this, but a fraction of a second can make the difference between no units lost and 16 probes lost. It is extremely coinflippy.
Widow mines take 3 seconds to burrow and another 1.5 seconds to fire. If you cant react to widow mines in 4.5 seconds, then I really dont know what to say. Most widow mines get only 3-4 kills before they die anyways. On the other hand, the oracle...
A widow mine that got 3-4 kills before the patch will end the game after the patch. Just to make sure you realize this: One WM will kill every probe in the entire spash radius of 1.75 instantly, which is half a mineral line. I'm not saying it will be impossible to defend. I've played against this for months. I'm just saying it increases the punishment for making a mistake as protoss. It's making a binary unit even more binary. It will lead to some easy wins if P makes a mistake, and will change almost nothing if they don't.
On July 23 2014 16:04 pmp10 wrote: That's surprising. Between Taeja winning IEM and terran rebound in code A I was sure that Blizzard would drop everything but the thor change.
Why would they drop needed mine changes for PVZ, just because 1 or 2 Terrans overseas is doing good? Teaja is just a godly player, does not mean Terran still has issues in TVZ and TVP. It's been 1 year since HOTS came out, Korean Zergs are perfectly fine with splitting vs old widow mines and playing more micro oriented instead of carelessly a moving banelings with out much splitting.
Muta cloud+speed overseer is what a lot of Koreans used to snipe off un protected widow mines back than, and it worked well before they nerfed the mine. Also Life back then was able to micro very well vs the old widow mine, it still does huge splash dmg to the Terran army.
Most Koreans agree that they should of left the Widow mine alone in the first place and let players adapt since it was a new expac, but low league community cried so much Blizzard just nerfed it. David Kim even said he regrets nerfing the widow mine.
Terrans do decently well in Code A as well in TvZ. It's just TvP that is a problem right now - but the patch doesn't really help there, does it? And overseas TvZ doesn't seem to be a problem neither, generally speaking.
I feel like this patch is outright overdoing it. I don't see how TvZ won't turn hugely in T favor, and I'm even afraid for TvP. Let me explain. With this totally impossible to understand +shields buff, colossi is now officially the only way to play a macro game in PvT (whether it's colossi blink double forge or colossi phoenix). And with Time Warp severely nerfed (which is a good thing), scvs pulls will come back with a vengeance.
I guess it's good since so many people seem to think whenever a T wins, it's out of skill, whereas whenever a Z/P wins it's because their race carries them (like Zest, Rain, soO or Life are just pushovers who wouldn't be diamond with T, what a joke). Since T will probably enter an era of dominance, those people will probably be happy.
It's sad because I think the ideas behind this patch showed we were heading towards the right direction (Thor buff isn't significant, but the Time Warp nerf was needed). But this widow mine buff is too much -I was pretty convinced there would be another iteration of the patch with a solid buff, but not restoring the pre patch widow mine.
On July 23 2014 09:08 Popkiller wrote: best part about playing in the gold league is I feel like balance patches don't really affect me. whether my race is under/overpowered, i'm too bad to really notice and there's always room for improvement on my part.
Well what you say is actually true for everyone except maybe top KR players, but most people are mistaken and think they're good enough to be affected by balance patches (me the first !).
This drivel needs to die. It has no backing in reality and is just a senseless way for people to kill balance discussion without actually having to refute any arguments. Its almost as bad as "Sample size too small!" (Unfailingly used by people who don't even know what the statistical definition of a sample is...)
Lower skill players are more affected by balance than professional players by any quantitative measure. This is true for two major reasons: First, the lower skill player-base is many, many, orders of magnitude larger, therefore even the smallest alterations in balance have statistically significant outcomes. Secondly, as there are many more lower skill players, the average skill difference is much smaller. This is further compounded by the matchmaking system which attempts to generate even matchups. Even matchups are far more likely to have their outcome altered by balance than a RO8 taeja vs foreigner stomp.
If you accept the above two points, is impossible to make a coherent argument that balance patches do not affect lower level players. If you want empirical proof, ladder distribution statistics are far more volatile than high-level win rates.
In fact, the idea that a patch exclusively affects high level play was contradicted in the very post that this thread is discussing! The Thor patch is expected to have a marginal affect on pros, but alter low level play.
It is fair to say a few things regarding low skill players and skill, namely that balance at low skill levels should not be a priority, and that spending a few hours practicing will improve your game-play far more than whining on tl.
It is not fair, or even logically coherent, to say that low skill players are somehow immune to balance patches. If marine damage was doubled overnight, would low level players be unaffected because they should just play better?
P.S. Nothing makes me laugh harder than when someone claims "sample size too small" when discussing the entire population of games in a tournament or time period.
I'm not saying it doesn't affect my games, I'm just saying it doesn't affect my mindset.
If I lose to an equally-skilled Protoss or Zerg because Terran is underpowered, so what? At my level, better macro and mechanics alone would have been enough to beat them, regardless of balance.
So when I lose, the answer to "what could I have done differently?" isn't "Nothing, the game is imbalanced." The answer is simple: play more and improve my macro. It's the same answer it would have been if the game was 100% balanced.
I'm not gonna get worked up over the game's balance, I'll leave that for the pros who are actually trying to make a living from this and are competing at a level where "just get better" isn't always a good enough answer.
Which means that, despite the fact that the system wants to 'equally match' players, you will have to do more effort to beat an equally matched player than he will need to beat you. This is imbalance. If a gold level terran needs platinum level mechanics to stay on top of a gold level protoss, there is something wrong.
@PkfWire: I wouldn't be sad if Terran entered an era of dominance because TvX games tend to be the most interesting by far.
While in some aspects I could agree that TvX games are indeed interesting from a spectator point of view, I don't see this lasting long when within a week every TvZ is a 4M push vs ling muta bane again and every TvP is bio vs colossi (well, nothing changed here...). Ha ha, if T is dominant again, at least TvT is quite a diverse match-up !
On July 23 2014 18:40 [PkF] Wire wrote: I feel like this patch is outright overdoing it. I don't see how TvZ won't turn hugely in T favor, and I'm even afraid for TvP. Let me explain. With this totally impossible to understand +shields buff, colossi is now officially the only way to play a macro game in PvT (whether it's colossi blink double forge or colossi phoenix). And with Time Warp severely nerfed (which is a good thing), scvs pulls will come back with a vengeance.
I guess it's good since so many people seem to think whenever a T wins, it's out of skill, whereas whenever a Z/P wins it's because their race carries them (like Zest, Rain, soO or Life are just pushovers who wouldn't be diamond with T, what a joke). Since T will probably enter an era of dominance, those people will probably be happy.
It's sad because I think the ideas behind this patch showed we were heading towards the right direction (Thor buff isn't significant, but the Time Warp nerf was needed). But this widow mine buff is too much -I was pretty convinced there would be another iteration of the patch with a solid buff, but not restoring the pre patch widow mine.
Everything that I crossed out is completely balance irrelevant. So your only reason why TvP will become imbalanced is that SCV pulls are stronger because of weaker TW?
I just said I'm afraid for TvP, not that I foresee any imbalance. SCV pulls are basically figured out, but Time Warp played a huge role in that, so that has to be kept an eye upon. That means wait and see. For TvZ, I can't imagine how Z will avoid having to go through a rough time of adaptation.
Anyway, discussing this patch further that "I think the mine buff is too much and should have been a bit toned down" is useless. The patch is going through, ill-advised though it may be. Everyone will adapt.
On July 23 2014 20:52 [PkF] Wire wrote: I just said I'm afraid for TvP, not that I foresee any imbalance. SCV pulls are basically figured out, but Time Warp played a huge role in that, so that has to be kept an eye upon. That means wait and see. For TvZ, I can't imagine how Z will avoid having to go through a rough time of adaptation.
Anyway, discussing this patch further that "I think the mine buff is too much and should have been a bit toned down" is useless. The patch is going through, ill-advised though it may be. Everyone will adapt.
Considering the Hydra buff, and how Roach based builds and Roach Hydra based builds vs Terran are being played at the highest Korean level with success, the mine reverted to the original state from start of HOTS is going to even out the playing field for Terran, It's not OP, Bio Vs ling bling will now be micro oriented, instead of crying, time for Zergs to start learning to micro better like Terran has had to do.
But if you don't want to learn mechanics and micro, Zerg can still go roach/hydra and force the Terran into Tank production, Even the old Widow mines were pretty crap vs Roach/hydra/Viper.
I still wish David Kim would focus on other aspects to help the PVT match up, but I guess it's to late into HOTS to make major changes and we will probably have to wait until next expac.
On July 23 2014 13:23 StaraCroft wrote: Is this really what terrans want? This basically means if you don't pull your probes in time against an early mine drop you will loose to one mine. And you might still loose if they send in a second medivac into the retreat path of your probes (haven't seen anyone do this since the beta). This doesn't seem like it addresses any balance concerns and will just give random wins to terran if they happen to land a lucky widow mine shot.
Yeah, lucky to find a protoss that has huge reaction times and does not move probes.
You obviously haven't played against this in the beta. If you don't pull the probes before the mine gets dropped it is better to not move them at all because you will just guide the widow mine shot into all of your probes loosing you the game instantly. Of course it's possible to play against this, but a fraction of a second can make the difference between no units lost and 16 probes lost. It is extremely coinflippy.
Widow mines take 3 seconds to burrow and another 1.5 seconds to fire. If you cant react to widow mines in 4.5 seconds, then I really dont know what to say. Most widow mines get only 3-4 kills before they die anyways. On the other hand, the oracle...
A widow mine that got 3-4 kills before the patch will end the game after the patch. Just to make sure you realize this: One WM will kill every probe in the entire spash radius of 1.75 instantly, which is half a mineral line. I'm not saying it will be impossible to defend. I've played against this for months. I'm just saying it increases the punishment for making a mistake as protoss. It's making a binary unit even more binary. It will lead to some easy wins if P makes a mistake, and will change almost nothing if they don't.
Again, how is this a bad thing ?
Don't see a problem in this department, either. Just build an Oracle and return the favor
On July 23 2014 13:23 StaraCroft wrote: Is this really what terrans want? This basically means if you don't pull your probes in time against an early mine drop you will loose to one mine. And you might still loose if they send in a second medivac into the retreat path of your probes (haven't seen anyone do this since the beta). This doesn't seem like it addresses any balance concerns and will just give random wins to terran if they happen to land a lucky widow mine shot.
Yeah, lucky to find a protoss that has huge reaction times and does not move probes.
You obviously haven't played against this in the beta. If you don't pull the probes before the mine gets dropped it is better to not move them at all because you will just guide the widow mine shot into all of your probes loosing you the game instantly. Of course it's possible to play against this, but a fraction of a second can make the difference between no units lost and 16 probes lost. It is extremely coinflippy.
Widow mines take 3 seconds to burrow and another 1.5 seconds to fire. If you cant react to widow mines in 4.5 seconds, then I really dont know what to say. Most widow mines get only 3-4 kills before they die anyways. On the other hand, the oracle...
A widow mine that got 3-4 kills before the patch will end the game after the patch. Just to make sure you realize this: One WM will kill every probe in the entire spash radius of 1.75 instantly, which is half a mineral line. I'm not saying it will be impossible to defend. I've played against this for months. I'm just saying it increases the punishment for making a mistake as protoss. It's making a binary unit even more binary. It will lead to some easy wins if P makes a mistake, and will change almost nothing if they don't.
Again, how is this a bad thing ?
Don't see a problem in this department, either. Just build an Oracle and return the favor
The widow mine vs oracle comparison is somewhat lacking. One is an almost natural transition in a normal bio setup. The other requires a a separate structure most likely used only for this oracle.
It's also lacking in that the oracle can usually snipe 4 workers even if directly countered, or just kill the entire mineral line if not, unlike a pair of widow mines which even if uncountered can't kill the entire mineral line, and then fly off and wait a minute for the shields to recharge for another go.
I would like to see the AI of the widow mine improved. For example, it would try not to hit single isolated units and instead aim for the center of enemy' mass.
I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
On July 23 2014 23:55 Loccstana wrote: I would like to see the AI of the widow mine improved. For example, it would try not to hit single isolated units and instead aim for the center of enemy' mass.
On July 24 2014 00:12 MockHamill wrote: I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
Well, then you also miss out on the Mech players like SuNo or Flash. But yes, I think makig tanks behave more like mines - strong single target damage, reasonable splash would help Mech a lot while not breaking anything.
On July 23 2014 13:23 StaraCroft wrote: Is this really what terrans want? This basically means if you don't pull your probes in time against an early mine drop you will loose to one mine. And you might still loose if they send in a second medivac into the retreat path of your probes (haven't seen anyone do this since the beta). This doesn't seem like it addresses any balance concerns and will just give random wins to terran if they happen to land a lucky widow mine shot.
An early mine drop is not going to kill all your probes, even if you don't scout it and have horrible reaction times. Not only should you see the medivac come out of the fog of war, you have the unloading time and then slow burrow.... this is a large window of time unless you just are not paying attention.
An oracle on the other hand is instant death if unprepared for, you can't just run two feet away and avoid worker losses entirely.
Also, with the way AI targeting works on the mine, you can very accurately estimate which unit is targeted, for those talking about a situation where the mine targets the last probe escaping the mine radius and leading the missile to the whole group.
On July 23 2014 23:55 Loccstana wrote: I would like to see the AI of the widow mine improved. For example, it would try not to hit single isolated units and instead aim for the center of enemy' mass.
On July 23 2014 03:31 DinoMight wrote: I just fucking hate widow mines.
I also hate Widow Mines. They're not fun to use as a Terran player, they're infuriating to play against and I find them pretty boring to watch in pro matches since there's little micro involved once they're burrowed.
Well put. Widows Mines were a bad addition in my opinion also, especially since they killed a really fun to watch, use, and play against unit: Siege Tanks.
I am going to start laddering again and just do mass Widow Mines and Vikings versus Protoss. As a former masters Protoss player, it is more difficult than you think to combat, because you have but one option: Storm.
1) Turn the Widow Mine into a mobile Auto-Turret / Perdition Turret (hell let it transform back and forth before burrowing) 2) Give the Raven a Point Defense Mine that fires Seeker Missiles with a cooldown similar to the existing Widow Mine.
On July 23 2014 03:31 DinoMight wrote: I just fucking hate widow mines.
I also hate Widow Mines. They're not fun to use as a Terran player, they're infuriating to play against and I find them pretty boring to watch in pro matches since there's little micro involved once they're burrowed.
Well put. Widows Mines were a bad addition in my opinion also, especially since they killed a really fun to watch, use, and play against unit: Siege Tanks.
I am going to start laddering again and just do mass Widow Mines and Vikings versus Protoss. As a former masters Protoss player, it is more difficult than you think to combat, because you have but one option: Storm.
I have been doing this. But it is very hard to get off the ground because you just die to any allin if you are not also building tanks (which still doesn't make you blink or immortal allin proof). Which then cuts a lot into your economy. And for a macro game, good blink control just kills all the mines before they kill any stalkers. Just good stalker and immortal control kills it. Given, with the drilling claws you can combat immortals quite well, but at the end of the day you are completely relying on the Protoss not kiting properly against the mines when they come. So yes, it is hard to play against it when you don't have good control, but you have much more options than just storm, since well controlled stalkers should never die to mines. Also canons just shut down the mine aggression. It's one of those styles that often catches an opponent offguard because he doesn't know what to do, but once you hit players that know it, you just give them freewins.
Imo, opening with mass hellion/tank is just better and only mixing in mines into the hellion harass.
As for widow mines + vikings style, as true as it is that it has only one counter, this is such a hard counter I'm not sure the style would be viable. This plus the fact that a well controlled blink stalkers + a sprinkle of immortals army should do very well in any timing. As for widow mines drops, they're now as strong as they were at release, so I don't see them become too trendy since good Protoss players will know how to react and get reasonably fast detection -maybe very early forge for quick cannon if needed will become the norm again.
A lot of people mentioned the possibility of the TvZ metagame shifting towards roach + hydra. It would be really interesting to see.
On the whole, though I really think the widow mine patch should have been a bit toned down, in the end I guess the patch is quite good (I realized that the WM buff in TvP boils down to +20(20) in 1.25-1.5 and +30(30) in 1.5-1.75. This is big but not something we won't be able to overcome : careful mine baiting with blink stalkers, hallucinations, charge against no drilling claws, and the simple fact that colossi do very well against mines and that those cut into your gas ; I don't see mine incorportation to the MMMVG being really beneficial).
On July 24 2014 01:53 [PkF] Wire wrote: A lot of people mentioned the possibility of the TvZ metagame shifting towards roach + hydra. It would be really interesting to see.
On the whole, though I really think the widow mine patch should have been a bit toned down, in the end I guess the patch is quite good.
Well, even with old mines, roach hydra was rarely seen. Though as a T, I love playing against that style since battles don't end in 2 seconds and tanks can be used.
On July 24 2014 01:53 [PkF] Wire wrote: A lot of people mentioned the possibility of the TvZ metagame shifting towards roach + hydra. It would be really interesting to see.
On the whole, though I really think the widow mine patch should have been a bit toned down, in the end I guess the patch is quite good.
Well, even with old mines, roach hydra was rarely seen. Though as a T, I love playing against that style since battles don't end in 2 seconds and tanks can be used.
I find that the biggest balance problems occur when a race has a disparity of strong cheeses.
I know a lot of us will quickly dismiss this opinion on the basis that a win is a win, regardless of how it is achieved, but in reality there is a difference.
A cheap win is much easier for a less skilled player to replicate, and this has led to the well accepted homogeneity of high level protoss players. A proxy oracle from any high skill Protoss player will execute roughly the same, whereas a parade push coming from Taeja will be incomparable to that from a foreign pro.
Protoss winners are a haphazard list of numerous players, many of whom have been forgotten. Terran, on the other hand, has a much more concentrated set of champions.
When a race has extremely powerful "low skill" options available (for another good example, see BL/Festor) we end up in a situation where not only are win rates and distributions getting skewed, but viewers can easily identify the disparity.
A perfect example is the present time, where ZvT is arguably more skewed than PvT in terms of recent winrates and tournament representation. But since Zerg wins are generally mid/late game plays with substantial micro they are accepted.
The reason why everyone hates Protoss is because of the prevalence of effective but low skill options. The vast majority of these builds are only viable because of the protection the MSC provides. Any proxy or hidden tech build can be rushed essentially unit-less which is just stupid.
I strongly agree with the fact that the buff is needed, but in the same time... yeah, WM is far from being the most interesting thing to play atm. Burrow/unborrow micro is the only available/practical micro available for this unit, which is kind of sad.
WM would be very cool IMO with something like 50/200 cost, and a cooldown in planting mines (spider ones, or real mines that explodes on the spot after being activated: in that case allow it to shoot air as well, or at least with the splash part.) although it does not give 'super micro' ability, it gives terran a mechanic the like of creep spread.
Part 1: it's fun (IMO creep spread is the best addition to macromechanics in SC2).
Part 2: defender's advantage: Terran mechanics is the only one which is RTS standard like, in front of instant warp and instant remax, terran is facing some troubles, especially in late stage of the game.
With a few Widow Mines creating constant map control and defensives options via minefields, it kind of balance things out easily. However, you need mechanics to do that, it does not add easy-turtle to the game as it needs babysitting.
At least Terran may get a come back in winrates in ZvT, and Maru agressive style TvP may get some fresh air via mines addition, but in terms of 'fun' there is better things to do.
On July 24 2014 00:12 MockHamill wrote: I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
Blizzard prolly gonna wait till LOV to make major changes. I'm not convinced they have the balls to make the changes necessary to dramaticly improve the game, but we can always hope they'll grow a pair.
The widow mine change may balance Terran, which is good, but it doesn't address the underlying issues Terran has had for a long time. Blizzard always talks a good game regarding game improvements but their actions don't measure up. Too timid when big changes are needed.
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
As much as I love Avilo for trying mech, he is definitely not a top tier Korean like you say, and I think all balance patches are directed towards problems at the top tier (mostly Koreans). Funnily, Bbyong has now done mech/raven three times in the ProLeague semifinals, but arguably on a specific map where he only won the first time surprising the opponent AND had a hidden expansion.
My argument was that Avilo is able to consistently pull off Raven transitions against all kinds of players, which was meant to include top tier Koreans.
To me personally, this is proof that Raven is severely underused.
I watch Avilo's stream. He doesn't generally play against the Koreans (he's honestly not at that level of skill). On the once-in-a-blue-moon occasion he does face one, he loses.
On July 23 2014 07:05 beg wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:47 PinheadXXXXXX wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:37 beg wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:31 iamcaustic wrote:
On July 23 2014 06:26 beg wrote: Secondly, why are so many people saying that Terran doesnt have T3 units? Jeee, can people finally start to build Ravens in TvZ?
This by the way gives an easy counter argument to everyone saying "when korean top tier pros never do a certain strategy, it means it's not viable, cause they must have tested it for sure". This obviously doesn't seem to be the case, cause Ravens are actually so strong that David Kim already openly spoke out about nerfing them.
The "doesn't have T3 units" argument takes into account the overall flow of a game, rather than the pure existence of late game units. Ravens are powerful (probably even OP) when massed, but getting to that critical mass of Ravens is generally not viable in professional play; your opponent will likely end up killing you before you can reach it. It's kind of like mass Void Rays in that regard.
Judging from the few relatively high level Raven games we do actually see, I'd actually disagree and say you're wrong. Avilo might not be Korean top tier, but if he can consistently pull off the Raven transition against pretty much every kind of opponent your argument seems shaky.
Also, I've seen several of the highest level Korean pros in situations where they not only could have pulled off the transition, but needed Ravens badly (say to defend against Broodlords), but it's still a rare sight to see anyone use Ravens.
This is an obvious flaw in Terran's current meta, if you ask me.
Avilo doesn't play like normal people though, he turtles on way less bases than he should actually have at any given time and never actually attacks. And he doesn't play bio, either. With bio if you let up the pressure you will get crushed, even with the new mines, and ravens won't make up for it as they don't do shit vs mutas. And that isn't even mentioning their complete lack of viability in a bio army.
Avilo does play "like normal people" who play mech and he can play Bio Raven in TvZ pretty well.
What I'm trying to say here, is.... you seem to be making your arguments up out of thin air. You assume that Raven probably sucks with Bio, because no one does it (and theorycrafting maybe). Am I right?
ps: i'm playing bio raven in every TvZ and it makes the zergs whine in a large number of cases
I can't wait to see your debut in WCS Challenger.
Of course Avilo loses against most top tier players, but it still looks like he'd have a really great chance at pulling off a Raven transition. And sometimes he does. And in superlategame he actually stands a great fight against Korean top tier Terrans...
So judging from this, I believe that a great player could regularly pull off a Raven transition in top tier matches. Your counter-argument is "but Avilo loses to top tier Koreans".
Let me try to sum up your opinion. Koreans don't play Raven, because there's no chances to transition? Is that what you're saying?
Doesn't even matter what my opinion is, yours is based entirely on speculation that has already been disproven by reality (bold emphasis mine). He also doesn't come close to competing with Korean top-tier Terrans. At best, he can take a lucky ladder game once in a blue moon against mid-tier Koreans.
Worse still is how he consistently fails to perform well with this style at a competitive level despite playing it all the time, against opponents who almost never face this style of play. In other words, the opponent's response isn't even optimal. This is just a general inevitability, as nobody at higher tiers plays the super late game mass-raven style on a regular basis. Usually when you buck the meta-game trend with a viable strategy, you can get a lot of free wins just by your opponent responding poorly. I honestly suspect this to be the only reason Avilo gets into GM in the first place, and also why he comes nowhere close to a professional level of play (hence his extremely early and embarassing drop outs in tournament qualifiers).
I hate to write these kinds of posts because it feels like I'm just bashing Avilo, but the real problem is people like you putting him on an unrealistic pedestal.
I'm sad I couldn't convince you in the slightest.
Here's another point: I could show you numerous top tier Korean games with Terrans going Mech, doing great until messing up by not transitioning to Raven. It's so tangible and easy to see, once you see an actual game. Anyway, I obviously cant be assed to search for the replays now.
If you dont trust me on that one, okay.
So you stick to your argument, "Koreans don't play it, so it's not viable in top tier"?
Obviously you won't be able to pull off a transition in every game. But the games where a transition seems reasonable are quite a few, IMHO.
PS: "Terran has no AoE", trololol.
I-I c-can show you b-but huh c-can't search replay f-for you. I s-swear.
Pretty much sums it up. Low-Masters-at-best thinks he knows better than the pros. Ravens are a perfectly viable unit (including a couple in your army composition is quite powerful, especially when going mech), but the idea of massing Ravens isn't competitively reasonable. It's not some new concept; if it was actually consistently viable to mass them we'd see players taking their money to the bank already.
I think the weirdest part was beg's p.s.; Terran has a bunch of AoE so wtf?
On July 24 2014 00:12 MockHamill wrote: I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
Blizzard prolly gonna wait till LOV to make major changes. I'm not convinced they have the balls to make the changes necessary to dramaticly improve the game, but we can always hope they'll grow a pair.
The widow mine change may balance Terran, which is good, but it doesn't address the underlying issues Terran has had for a long time. Blizzard always talks a good game regarding game improvements but their actions don't measure up. Too timid when big changes are needed.
We can't even be sure if LotV will have any multiplayer changes. For all we know it might end up as singleplayer-only campaign. And even if it dose change things - competitive scene may be dead by the time it's out. Sadly the time for fixing SC2 was about a year ago.
On July 24 2014 00:12 MockHamill wrote: I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
Blizzard prolly gonna wait till LOV to make major changes. I'm not convinced they have the balls to make the changes necessary to dramaticly improve the game, but we can always hope they'll grow a pair.
The widow mine change may balance Terran, which is good, but it doesn't address the underlying issues Terran has had for a long time. Blizzard always talks a good game regarding game improvements but their actions don't measure up. Too timid when big changes are needed.
We can't even be sure if LotV will have any multiplayer changes. For all we know it might end up as singleplayer-only campaign.
Only if Blizzard wants to shoot themselves in the foot. Highly unlikely.
On July 24 2014 00:12 MockHamill wrote: I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
Ha, i'm in the same boat. These latest changes make me not watch SC2 any more since bio+WM is boring to see in every game and any mech helping patch seems very unlikely for at least a few months now. Even the hope is gone lol
On July 24 2014 00:12 MockHamill wrote: I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
Ha, i'm in the same boat. These latest changes make me not watch SC2 any more since bio+WM is boring to see in every game and any mech helping patch seems very unlikely for at least a few months now. Even the hope is gone lol
So you aren't watching sc2 for what, 2 years now ? bio+WM is still the most standard way to play sc2, some pro remplace WMs with HBs but all in all the MU is strictly the same. Stop saying non senses please. Mech never was the standard but for a couple of months in 2012. And it probably never be. Mech had their tanks buffed, upgrades buffed. Mech is less viable than bio at the top play because it scales much less with the overall skill than bio, deal with it.
And btw, no one care that you will stop watching sc2 because there will be exactly as much mech game as there is now.
On July 24 2014 05:08 gneGne wrote: David Kim already admitted working on new units and balance issues for LotV. So multiplayer changes are confirmed.
Indeed, new units.. While we all agree since the beta of WoL that so many protoss units (sentry, warpgate, collosus) where an absolute design faillure. Ive given up the hope that blizzard will ever make the real changes that Sc2 needs. Its a shame though.
On July 24 2014 05:08 gneGne wrote: David Kim already admitted working on new units and balance issues for LotV. So multiplayer changes are confirmed.
Clearly, adding new units is what this game needs. I mean, the last iteration was such a smashing success, what with the MSC and the swarm host really revitalizing the game.
Squat, I couldn't agree more. Adding units without removing some would be an utter mess. I hope that either one of the following happens :
1) Some units are scrapped (corruptor, swarm host, tempest, oracle...) and replaced with better designed ones.
2) Current units get a rework and the novelty aspect of the expansion would actually lay in new buildings, which I think would be great (I already suggested, for argument's sake, a track repair for T airforce, creep spreading Nydus for Z, and shield battery for P).
If they add units on units we'll end up with so many units (I think we're already at more than BW level in terms of number of units) the game will be as good as impossible to balance.
Edit for the post below : a balanced game have units overlap as little as possible (the reason why the warhound was scrapped for instance, for good reasons), so I kinda meant that here too. Not saying every unit should have one role and not another, but having two units filling the same role in the same race isn't normally interesting design.
Game doesnt really get harder to balance with more units. Most units just will not be used outside of tiny roles or overlap if there are too many. So yeah, it would be cooler to see some old stuff reworked, though we dont know if with new units he means replacing old ones or juat adding them. Like in the case of the SH it sounded a lit like they'd just want to replace it and in general he rather just answered questions about old BW ubits coming back with: "there might be some but there also might be something completely new".
I don't believe they have to make these big overall redesigns (like removing warpgate or central units such as the Collosus), but rather, I hope they just rework how a lot of the units work and focus on creating solid unit interactions.
Imho the game is close to be awesome. No need to change it a lot. Remove some protoss early game possibility, make the game less coinflippy. Remove/Reworks SH/viper/msc/corruptor/oracle. And the game will be neat. Seriously, if you works on protoss early aggressions, and zergs SHs, everything will be exciting again. Giving a better AA for Z instead of corruptor will help them a lot against late game mech TvZ, so they won't need to go SHs everygame. You can rework the MSC, for exemple making it back like it was in the beta, preventing it to move from a nexus, or even better, make some sort of "chain" that allow the MSC to move to a certain distance, reduce OC range. Make oracle slower. And we're done. Might nerf the +shield damage to the WM after that (still willing to see if it's strong or not tho).
So there is only 2 units that you can replace in the game, SH and corruptor. Maybe tempest, but I think the unit is fine if it gets nerfed against heavy ship. And maybe thor but I'm not even sure. And what the hell I love my collector thor edition and I would be pissed if they removed it.
On July 24 2014 06:44 Hider wrote: I don't believe they have to make these big overall redesigns (like removing warpgate or central units such as the Collosus), but rather, I hope they just rework how a lot of the units work and focus on creating solid unit interactions.
Yup. Overly messing with the game mechanics just destroys the game. Making units/strategies interact better is what actually makes the game more fun. E.g. Dont remove the collossus, play a little with its stats and maybe its capability to stand on top of other units so that it's control becomes more interesting, but leave its role intact. Though i hope the SH goes away. As much as I love the possibility of drawn out games and those games themself, SHs are just boring for both sides.
On July 24 2014 05:08 gneGne wrote: David Kim already admitted working on new units and balance issues for LotV. So multiplayer changes are confirmed.
Clearly, adding new units is what this game needs. I mean, the last iteration was such a smashing success, what with the MSC and the swarm host really revitalizing the game.
Though adding new units is not DKim's job, right? He's there to assure a balanced game, not a well designed game. I think people tend to forget that. His job is to play with numbers so players can play more or less balanced game and not RPS.
And still I don't think they will fix the biggest problems in TvP in LotV.
IMO they need to rework Protoss and Bio and they won't do any of these. Adding medic -> freeing starport(so you CAN build a raven and you don't have to stress what to build first - vikings or medivacs), thus allowing early game aggression, thus making drops less dangerous and NOT feedbackable(why have mana & heal on drop ships when you have medics?) and because you need to build medics you can buff tanks(because you need more barracks to actgually build a proper army). You want to feedback ghost? Hit them not medics, challenge accepted(same problem as feedbacking any unit in or under a swarm of overseers) Also freeing starports enables, IMO, better transition into air(or mech if you buff tanks). You can rework a whole race by adding a SINGLE goddamn unit to a new level of play.
Protoss redesign is much more problematic and well discussed elsewhere.
On July 24 2014 06:44 Hider wrote: I don't believe they have to make these big overall redesigns (like removing warpgate or central units such as the Collosus), but rather, I hope they just rework how a lot of the units work and focus on creating solid unit interactions.
Yup. Overly messing with the game mechanics just destroys the game. Making units/strategies interact better is what actually makes the game more fun. E.g. Dont remove the collossus, play a little with its stats and maybe its capability to stand on top of other units so that it's control becomes more interesting, but leave its role intact. Though i hope the SH goes away. As much as I love the possibility of drawn out games and those games themself, SHs are just boring for both sides.
Yeh, for the Collosus I hope that Blizzard creates synergy between it and the Warp Prism (which the Reaver had). That can be done by removing AA vulnerability and then rebalance it in a different way. But ofc that requires tweaks to Vikings and Corrupters in order to maintain their usefullness as well. That's not necceasrily a bad thing as I think neither of those units work as well as they do anyway.
For Corrupter, what if it had a new ability that affected friendly units in an area, like Dark Swarm does? That creates a new interaction where you wanna put position Hydras and Roaches in a different way so they benefit from the ability. For Viking, since it's interactions are pretty bad vs Dropships/BC's, Carriers/Tempests, why not simply opt for the BW solution here? Make the Thor the anti-armored unit and the Viking the primary anti-light. But maintain some kind of synergy so you don't just mass either of them, but mix them in together. Further, Viking could be a ton better offensively through faster transformation which will give it utility in a lot of different situations.
For Swarm Host, I think it's very important for the game that zerg acutally has a unit with a defenders advantage. But Blizzard should look at why the Lurker works and the Swarm Host doesn't. Contray to common belief, the issue isn't that Swarm Hosts fires "free units" instead of a "line"-attack, but rather that Swarm Host has an effective range of around 25-30 and is quite weak in close encounters.
I think the SH could work if it had an effective range between 9 and 11 so Siege Tanks can outrange Swarm Hosts in siege mode but not in tank-mode.
Raven obviously also needs a rework. It needs to scale worse and could also use more synergy with bio-play in order to create more variety for late-game bio play.
But overall, I think HOTS has a lot of "cool" units and has some type of fundamental to be an insanely fun game. But many of the unit-stats just needs a rework in my opinion in order to create more fun interactions.
Yeah, Colossi could be fixed in many ways. Currently it just stands around and shots. Its kiting is useful but rarely necessary or really helpful.
Not sure what to do with Corruptor other than change it. It's so far from interesting that basically anything would improve it.
For the SH I fully agree. Did you happen to fall over that video I once posted about a SH variation I created with the editor? (Can link you tomorrow, just turned off the PC :-) )
I think the Raven's main problem is that the energy and costs are poorly calculated for it. It has too much potential at maxed energy and too little upon popping.
On July 24 2014 00:12 MockHamill wrote: I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
Ha, i'm in the same boat. These latest changes make me not watch SC2 any more since bio+WM is boring to see in every game and any mech helping patch seems very unlikely for at least a few months now. Even the hope is gone lol
So you aren't watching sc2 for what, 2 years now ? bio+WM is still the most standard way to play sc2, some pro remplace WMs with HBs but all in all the MU is strictly the same. Stop saying non senses please. Mech never was the standard but for a couple of months in 2012. And it probably never be. Mech had their tanks buffed, upgrades buffed. Mech is less viable than bio at the top play because it scales much less with the overall skill than bio, deal with it.
And btw, no one care that you will stop watching sc2 because there will be exactly as much mech game as there is now.
Yes, i've watched very little SC2 in the last year or so. Completely gave up on foreign tournaments and most of GSL. I only watch the occasional VODS of pro league of a few Terran players that are still using some variety in their play style.
Between imbalances (almost no Terran in GSL for a long time) and a lack of diversity, SC2 is not fun to watch for me any more. Glad you like it though, douchebag.
When is the last time someone has seen roach drops (do ventral sacs still even exist??)? Banshee/hellion harass against P? 2-base tank pushes against P? Nukes against z? etc.
I can't believe people are saying the game is close to what it should be. There is not even half the diversity WOL had. And in the end that game was ruined by horrible balance, but it still produced a hell lot of more diverse games than HOTS does currently.
Not sure what to do with Corruptor other than change it. It's so far from interesting that basically anything would improve it.
Yeh, indeed. And then when you look at BW and see that there exist this concept which isn't added into Sc2, but people really like... Then it just makes sense to add a variation of that to the Corrupter which already lacks ATG utility.
For the SH I fully agree. Did you happen to fall over that video I once posted about a SH variation I created with the editor? (Can link you tomorrow, just turned off the PC :-) )
On July 24 2014 07:23 Jarree wrote: When is the last time someone has seen roach drops (do ventral sacs still even exist??)? Banshee/hellion harass against P? 2-base tank pushes against P? Nukes against z? etc.
I can't believe people are saying the game is close to what it should be. There is not even half the diversity WOL had. And in the end that game was ruined by horrible balance, but it still produced a hell lot of more diverse games than HOTS does currently.
While I agree that some of these things disapeared, beside banshees/2base push against P that became impossible because of MSC (that should be reworked). About nuke, or roach drop... Nothing prevent players to do it. Absolutly nothing. That was terribly rare in WoL and it still is now. But nothing in the game changes that would make it impossible.
I'll quit Zerg then I guess. I can't win against Terran anyway and now the shittiest unit in this game (mine) (after SH) gets even stronger =/ Can't deal with this as Zerg
Just read one of Dustin Browders old comments on TvP mech viability during HOTS Beta. It was kinda interesting.
After holding early pressure a Terran player can them go with a ground-based Tank army through the mid-game which gives the Terran the flexibility to deal with a variety of Protoss threats. For example, a possible Protoss counter would be to go to the air against a Terran Siege Tank and Hellbat heavy force. Terran players can sometimes transition into Thor + Hellbat + Viking if this occurs. With Factory and Starport Terran players can sometimes create a well-rounded army that can deal with many Protoss threats.
Obviously a large number of Immortals can be an issue for a Tank heavy force but sometimes Ghosts can make the difference if EMP is used as the Protoss engage.
What I find interesting here is that DB seems completely unfocussed on whether terran mech has any aggressive timing/harss tools or whether there are any types of fun interactions.
All he is focussed on is unit-counters. When enemy gets unit X, you can get unit Y and win. I kinda hope that he isn't involved in the development of LOTV, and that David Kim instead has his responsibilty. Not that David Kim is perfect, but overall his comments (given his limitations) showcases a better understanding of the acutal issues.
On July 24 2014 07:32 NKexquisite wrote: Call me crazy. I dont see this changing TvP late game in the slightest.
Not sure if ironic, but it's pretty much safe to say this patch is not going to change PvT lategame in decisive fashion.
A point though ; when P and T reach lategame in good conditions and the armies trade evenly, sometimes the P could just remake 50 supply of chargelot archon and walk his way to the win. If the T is smart, sacrifices some SCVs and keeps a defensive mine field, he would be able to deal with those kind of situations far better because those mines just obliterate any chargelot archon army. Just theorycrafting ofc, not even sure that's practical, but that's something I'd really love to see T experiment with.
i really wish they would stop using such wishy-washy expressions like "feel" "looking at" "sometimes" "believe". man up and make a fking statement ffs!
After holding early pressure a Terran player can them go with a ground-based Tank army through the mid-game which gives the Terran the flexibility to deal with a variety of Protoss threats. For example, a possible Protoss counter would be to go to the air against a Terran Siege Tank and Hellbat heavy force. Terran players can sometimes transition into Thor + Hellbat + Viking if this occurs. With Factory and Starport Terran players can sometimes create a well-rounded army that can deal with many Protoss threats.
Obviously a large number of Immortals can be an issue for a Tank heavy force but sometimes Ghosts can make the difference if EMP is used as the Protoss engage.
What I find interesting here is that DB seems completely unfocussed on whether terran mech has any aggressive timing/harss tools or whether there are any types of fun interactions.
All he is focussed on is unit-counters. When enemy gets unit X, you can get unit Y and win. I kinda hope that he isn't involved in the development of LOTV, and that David Kim instead has his responsibilty. Not that David Kim is perfect, but overall his comments (given his limitations) showcases a better understanding of the acutal issues.
Could not agree more.
I give a lot of shit to DB, but to be fair he did a good job with WOL, as far as the big picture goes. HOTS showed IMO his limitations in not being capable or not wanting to look in to more detail as far as strategies go. He has an over simplistic view of the game IMO, make army move out, make counter to what the opponent is doing, repeat. When it came to making harass options for protoss again he showed narrow thinking, by making a "harass" unit that's just simplistic and boring in both function and control.
LOTV should have in charge a lead designer that understands the game (pro level play) at a much deeper level. Maybe an overhaul is not needed, but there are a number of units that need special attention to be made in to fun esport units, and strategies need to be viewed in more detail, like the mech harass network that is so bare bones.
Exactly. Tempest is the epitome of the difficulties DB has to make an unit that is not meant to be a hard counter : remember it was supposed to wreck muta balls and ended up being such a brood lord killer it isn't even fun. A very bad unit which even overlapped in some ways on the role a carefully made carrier could have filled.
I give a lot of !@#$%^&* to DB, but to be fair he did a good job with WOL, as far as the big picture goes. HOTS showed IMO his limitations in not being capable or not wanting to look in to more detail as far as strategies go. He has an over simplistic view of the game IMO, make army move out, make counter to what the opponent is doing, repeat.
Yeh kinda agree with this. If DB's role is limited to coming up with the overall new concepts of units/game-mechanics and then Blizzard have other guys to refine the ideas in order to create interesting interactions, Sc2 could be pretty solid. Given the way the units ended up being, the outcome wasn't difficult to predict. Below are some quotes of "predictions" I made 1½ years ago (during HOTS BETA), which was at a time where I was very green on game-design.
I haven't played HOTS; only watched a couple of games with the SH, and those games are just terribly boring.
Honestly I think mech now is about getting the critical amount of ravens rather than the critical amount of tanks. Problem with ravens are that they are kinda a boring unit for 99% of the time. With most units you can do a lot of stuff with them even when your not in a battle.
Mech is never goanna be truly viable, the only viable mech we will see is "deathball mech."
(Context here was: Deathball mech = Raven/Ghost + Tanks.)
My points with these quotes are that the issues with how HOTS ended up being were quite obvious. It wasn't really something that there was no way Blizzard could have seen coming, and thus it is clear that there was some type of flawed methology in how Blizzard worked on HOTS. Given DB's simplistic view on game-design and the fact that he doesn't seem so involved anymore, there is hope for LOTV.
When it came to making harass options for protoss again he showed narrow thinking, by making a "harass" unit that's just simplistic and boring in both function
Actually I typically defend David Kim when he gets criticied by the wider community and various pro gamers. I read almost all of the suggestions from various people, and most of it is just really bad. In order to be better at a job than someone, you need to at the very least understand the thought proces behind the decision-making of the guy your claiming does a bad job.
Also, I am sure that David Kim in many ways is limited in his job function. There are probably lots of changes he would have liked to make, but isn't capable of, which makes his "results" look worse.
Most pro-gamers could probably be decent/good lead-designers with 1-2 years of "training", however as it is right now, David Kim does a much better job than the average pro would do.
When it came to making harass options for protoss again he showed narrow thinking, by making a "harass" unit that's just simplistic and boring in both function and control.
The idea of a protoss ATG harass unit is very solid, but the execution of this is so incredibly bad. IMO all the Oracle needed was to have a much better moving shot and lower damage vs light units. I don't understand why Blizzard didn't use the concepts that worked in BW (very microable units w/ lower damage values).
Exactly. Tempest is the epitome of the difficulties DB has to make an unit that is not meant to be a hard counter : remember it was supposed to wreck muta balls and ended up being such a brood lord killer it isn't even fun. A very bad unit which even overlapped in some ways on the role a carefully made carrier could have filled.
Protoss air in general is just quite bad. It has multiple units overlapping with each other and micro interactions are very boring/non-existant. Thus, it needs a complete overhaul. Here is what I would do.
My suggestions for protoss air changes in LOTV (warning: long post incoming)
This means that the Tempest can be a relatively mobile unit in the later game that breakes static defense and work for itself.
Void Ray. - Low acceleration - 4 range - More beefy (2 armor, more HP/shield - Leash-range reduced from 2 to around 0.5, so enemy units can actually escape (which should encourage micro).
Due to it's high HP/low range it will synergize well with all other protoss air units, but will be quite medicore in a straihgt up battle asusming the enemy micro's.
Carrier: The Carrier should be an expensive, supply effective unit that can be used to break someone that goes uber turtle. This can be obtained by increasing maximum amount of interceptors it can fire, which makes it stronger but also more expensive as it needs to pay to rebuild intercettrs. Further, as I previously wrote, I would like to see the Thor have more of a Goliath-role here. That means that it's anti-armored attack should be buffed signifciantly while it's antilight/splash attack should be changed somewhat. Further, Vikings are weaker vs armored air units.
Given that the Thor has two modes, why not try and create some actually synergy between those two Thor modes. Wouldn't it be cool if you could switch back and fourth during battles against Carriers?
Actually it is possible (I tested it). What is required are the following changes:
- Carrier's intercetpors are more clumped up (more vulnerable to splash from the Thor) - Interceptors have slightly less HP/more damage - Thor splash damage needs to be a bit larger - Thor transformation time needs to be reduced from 4 seconds to less than 1 second.
This way the terran player wanna target fire the Carriers with the Anti-armored weapon, but if he is good, he can move your injured Thors back behind the other Thors and switch them into anti-splash mode where it targets intercetors instead while keeping the Thors out of the Carriers attack-range.
Oracle. In order to give it moving shot you need to max out it's acceleration and turn-rate + set damage point at 0. For it to be efficient to make the same type of Mutalisk micro vs Marines as saw in BW, the further changes are needed: - Range increased to 6. - Attack speed reduced by 50% - It needs to have less HP/shield (in order to be balanced) - Damage vs light reduced a bit as well. - Seperation radius reduced (so you can stack Oracles better, this is important due to how the Starcraft-editor is bugged as Lalush explained in his "depht of micro"-video.
(FYI: I am not making this up. I spent multiple hours tweaking various stats values in order to get the desired "interaction-effects")
The unit roles
Oracle = Good vs Widow Mine if detected, but weak vs it in the sense that it dies in 1 hit. Vs Vikings it has no answer in straight combat, but has a mobility advantage vs Vikings. Thors are decent vs Oracles. Vs Marines, the outcome depends on micro. 4 marines can take out 1 oracle, but if the Oracle micro's well it can take out 6-7 Marines.
Void Ray. Very strong if enemy doesn't micro, Can tank Marine shots quite well and thus synergizes well with the other higher DPS protoss units. It is good vs Widow Mines in the sense that it can tank multiple shots, but weak vs it since it can't outrange it, has no detection and typically can't fly away from it in time. Vikings are very weak in a straight up engagements vs it, but can kite it.
Tempest: You can get it out in tier2, where you can make some pressure oriented builds with it and take advantage of terrain. It needs to kite vs Marines as it's weak vs them in straight combat, but due to it's slower movement speed it can't kite forever. Further, Widow Mines can catch up to it, but on the other hand it can outrange Widow Mines from a safe distance. In a straight up battle, this is very weak vs Thors, but late game it has a mobility upgrade which means it can take advantage of the immoilbity of the mech-army and haras it. Vikings trade roughly even vs this unit.
Carrier: It's also kinda weak vs the Thor (similar to the Tempest), but there are the following diferences; A) Later tech, B) Slower production, C) Unique micro-interaction, D) much more supply-effective, so if the terran mech player turtles on few bases and has lots of tanks, you cannot finish him off with Tempests, but Carriers can often times be the better job if you have the superior economy
Overall, this should mean that all of protoss air units have unique micro interactions and unique unit roles with various advantages/disadvantage compared to their teran counterparts. There are no hardcounters here as all of the terran "counter"-options have some type of disadvantage against the specific protoss air unit. Instead, the terran player needs to rely on a mix of Thors, Vikings, Mines and Marines to effectively combat a good protoss air player. But I hope that this just functions as an example of how much new gameplay you can create by just changing stats values. You don't need to come in with completley new units or remove old units. For me, it's instead all about the numbers.
What if Thors could attack both air and ground at the same time? Fuck the mine buff, let's see some thors be -really- useful. They can more reliably fill the role of marines for mech - busting open ground units with thor hammers while simultaneously supporting vikings with their ground-to-air splash. Also solves the ridiculous issue of thor target priority.
Limit it so that thors have to face the direction theyre shooting, so there isn't a thor shooting an ultra in the front and a mutalisk in the back. With their clunky movement and turn-rate, they should lose a lot of effectiveness when flanked. So they'll be stronger defensively; holding frontal all-ins from Zergs and follow-up nastification that is constant tech switching.
It could come as an upgrade or an automatic unlock when Terrans build fusion core or something that opens up late-game.
Not sure what to do with Corruptor other than change it. It's so far from interesting that basically anything would improve it.
Yeh, indeed. And then when you look at BW and see that there exist this concept which isn't added into Sc2, but people really like... Then it just makes sense to add a variation of that to the Corrupter which already lacks ATG utility.
For the SH I fully agree. Did you happen to fall over that video I once posted about a SH variation I created with the editor? (Can link you tomorrow, just turned off the PC :-) )
No I didn't see it.
Honestly when you think about it, the expansion units are actually used fairly rarely in Broodwar.
TvT, ZvZ, PvP - Expansion units not used at all. TvP - Expansion units only used very rarely, DT cheeses are about it. TvZ - Medics and lurkers are used if Terran goes bio, but expansion units are not used at all if Terran goes mech. Not sure which one is more popular but they're unused in at least half of all these games. ZvP - Corsairs are used in most games.
Not sure what to do with Corruptor other than change it. It's so far from interesting that basically anything would improve it.
Yeh, indeed. And then when you look at BW and see that there exist this concept which isn't added into Sc2, but people really like... Then it just makes sense to add a variation of that to the Corrupter which already lacks ATG utility.
For the SH I fully agree. Did you happen to fall over that video I once posted about a SH variation I created with the editor? (Can link you tomorrow, just turned off the PC :-) )
No I didn't see it.
Honestly when you think about it, the expansion units are actually used fairly rarely in Broodwar.
TvT, ZvZ, PvP - Expansion units not used at all. TvP - Expansion units only used very rarely, DT cheeses are about it. TvZ - Medics and lurkers are used if Terran goes bio, but expansion units are not used at all if Terran goes mech. Not sure which one is more popular but they're unused in at least half of all these games. ZvP - Corsairs are used in most games.
So, that's one and a half matchups out of six?
What does that have to do with anything? I was talking about how there is a general consensus that people like the Dark Swarm in BW + moving shot of air units, and that Blizzard didn't apply those concepts to Sc2.
And not that it is relevant, but let's get the facts straight: Medics and lurkers are used in almost 100% of TvZ's in BW at current "pro"-level. PvZ = Lurker used quite often.
On July 24 2014 10:26 Faust852 wrote: I really don't like comparison between BW and SC2, the game's way too different.
If you read my prevous post, I think it should be quite clear that this isn't about putting BW solutions directly into Sc2, but about taking concepts that work well in BW and adapt them to Sc2. That's basically how you learn about RTS game-design. You look at previous designs and try to understand why they worked and which variables you would have to change in order to make them work under a different environment.
Moving Shots work well in BW for air units. For SC2, blizzard chose to go a diferent way with air units and fucked totally up (FYI, this was basically what Lalush talked about in his "depht of micro"-video. There is no logical reason for this, and you can easily make the Oracle for instance a moving-shot based unit and create a much more fun playing experience for the protoss player and his opponent.
Now, let's look at at spells. Why are there no spells where you cast them on the ground and then they give your own units some kind of attribute. Dark Swarm did that, but obvously you cannot give Zerg Dark Swarm in Sc2. But the concept of an AOE-ability affecting friendly unit could IMO be applied to the Corrupter. It would just make that unit a ton more fun to use instead of making it an anti-Collosus unit.
I don't think it was the intention of Blizzard to remove these kind of micro ability. They just make the game and it happens that you couldn't abuse the IA the same way. And they don't want to modify it back because well, it took them 4 years to revert a patch they did, they are way too pride for admitting they did things wrong.
On July 24 2014 10:35 Faust852 wrote: I don't think it was the intention of Blizzard to remove these kind of micro ability. They just make the game and it happens that you couldn't abuse the IA the same way. And they don't want to modify it back because well, it took them 4 years to revert a patch they did, they are way too pride for admitting they did things wrong.
But you don't have to change the AI to make the moving-shot micro optimally. In Starbow, you do the same type of Muta-micro as in BW (works slightly different ofc, but it's there). How was that done?
1) 3.5 range (from the 3 in BW) 2) Lower seperation radius (so they clump up more).
The latter though isn't actually dead neccesary You can still make Mutalisks efficiently kite stimmed Marines in Sc2, but that requires an increase in Mutalisks range from 3 to 4.5 (again, I am not making stuff up, I have tested this quite extensively. All the micro-interactions I described in my post are possible, and I listed all the changes needed for that to happen).
The advantage of increasing the range of Mutalisks is that you can reduce Mutalisk HP/regeneration as a compensation and then Mutalisk suddenly become more vulnerable to Psy Storms. But instead, they become better in lower numbers and also better when you micro them very well. Sc2 Mutalisks aren't what I would call a microunit, but more of a multitaskbased unit. When you choose to engage with it, all you can do is really just to focus fire. But with a 4.5 range it becomes effective to move in, go back and move in against stimed Marines. So you never just wanna amove them at any point in time.
For all other air units, they have damage points. I am very much against that as it means they have to stop for x seconds before they can shoot. Damage point is IMO one of the biggest destroyers of "moving-based" micro as it becomes more practical to just stand still with the unit during an engagement. But that can easily be changed in the editor.
Oracle has the worst type of unit control of any air unit as it has low acceleration/low turning rate. Again, that is easily changed in the editor. From my perspective it looked like Blizzard wanted to experiemnt with a new air design to protoss: Super high DPS, but make it have a very poor control, so it was "difficult" control. But unfortunately, the difficult to control-element meant that it became unmicroable. I think quite early in HOTS beta, it should have been obvious that the experiemnt didn't work, and IMO they should definitely have made the Oracle a moving-shot unit before HOTS was released.
I agree with you that units should be weaker in general but the more you miccro them, the best they become. That's the best way to raise the skill ceiling of the game, and it's very impressive from a spectator POV. But you heard what DKim thought about it. It's no use to talk about it because they are blinded by their incompetence and pride. Even now when they say "we are listening to the community", they do shit that aren't that much relevent to the real problems.
I'm pretty sure the message about micro potential etc has taken its time to sink in but is doing so and that we'll have some pleasant surprises when LotV is announced.
On July 24 2014 10:51 Faust852 wrote: I agree with you that units should be weaker in general but the more you miccro them, the best they become. That's the best way to raise the skill ceiling of the game, and it's very impressive from a spectator POV. But you heard what DKim thought about it. It's no use to talk about it because they are blinded by their incompetence and pride. Even now when they say "we are listening to the community", they do !@#$%^&* that aren't that much relevent to the real problems.
Yeh maybe. Though my theory is still this:
- WOL = All devs were relatively ignorant of game-design when this game was released. But over the last 4 years, they have learned alot and should now be more comepetent than ever.
For most of WOL, game was pretty popular and when they developed HOTS they saw no reason to risk messing up what appeared to be a pretty solid game. Further, ppl like DB might also have had a negative influence on some of the unit-designs.
For LOTV, we have David Kim who at least is a decent player and he is responsible for making an expansion to a game where most people wants to see bigger changes. Unlike when HOTS was developed, there isn't as much to lose anymore, so Blizzard might be willing to gamble a bit more.
Again, the gamble here doesn't have to be removal of existing untis or complete redesigns/new races etc. But rather, just looking overall the stats of various units and trying to refine them in order to create new interactions.
I actually don't think it's that time-consuming giving that it's a full-time job, so from a ressource-perspective, it's still within what Blizzard would allow the Sc2-team to spend time on.
On July 24 2014 11:06 Faust852 wrote: I even wonder if DB ever played the game too. Rob Pardo would have made the best multi competitive game ever, I'm sure of it.
On July 24 2014 11:06 Faust852 wrote: I even wonder if DB ever played the game too. Rob Pardo would have made the best multi competitive game ever, I'm sure of it.
Rob Pardo advocated for Warp Gates, I hear.
I think WG is a cool mechanic. But it's poorly designed.
On July 24 2014 11:06 Faust852 wrote: I even wonder if DB ever played the game too. Rob Pardo would have made the best multi competitive game ever, I'm sure of it.
Rob Pardo advocated for Warp Gates, I hear.
I think WG is a cool mechanic. But it's poorly designed.
It's pretty easy to fix. Just make warping in cost more cooldown than producing from regular gateways and it's just fine.
On July 24 2014 11:06 Faust852 wrote: I even wonder if DB ever played the game too. Rob Pardo would have made the best multi competitive game ever, I'm sure of it.
Rob Pardo advocated for Warp Gates, I hear.
I think WG is a cool mechanic. But it's poorly designed.
It's pretty easy to fix. Just make warping in cost more cooldown than producing from regular gateways and it's just fine.
Yeah, it just require a huge amount of balancing and even in LotV it would take ages to make it works. Imho the best way would be that you can't produce certain units in WG mode. A bit like terran can't produce marauders with reactor. It would help considerably in the late game too when a protoss can't morph archon directly in front your base.
Edit : Actually I just come with this idea, but the more I think about it, the more I think this idea is brillant.
On July 24 2014 11:06 Faust852 wrote: I even wonder if DB ever played the game too. Rob Pardo would have made the best multi competitive game ever, I'm sure of it.
Rob Pardo advocated for Warp Gates, I hear.
I think WG is a cool mechanic. But it's poorly designed.
It's pretty easy to fix. Just make warping in cost more cooldown than producing from regular gateways and it's just fine.
Yeah, it just require a huge amount of balancing and even in LotV it would take ages to make it works. Imho the best way would be that you can't produce certain units in WG mode. A bit like terran can't produce marauders with reactor. It would help considerably in the late game too when a protoss can't morph archon directly in front your base.
Edit : Actually I just come with this idea, but the more I think about it, the more I think this idea is brillant.
Yeah, like blink stalker. They are scarry because of warpgate not the ability itself. I have read some random suggestion somewhere that they should take templar of the warpgate and buff it's movement a little bit. This kind of thing sound good( at least for terran like me) but it would take a lot of test and i would not hope for this kind of change even in Lotv.
On July 24 2014 11:06 Faust852 wrote: I even wonder if DB ever played the game too. Rob Pardo would have made the best multi competitive game ever, I'm sure of it.
Rob Pardo advocated for Warp Gates, I hear.
I think WG is a cool mechanic. But it's poorly designed.
It's pretty easy to fix. Just make warping in cost more cooldown than producing from regular gateways and it's just fine.
Yeah, it just require a huge amount of balancing and even in LotV it would take ages to make it works. Imho the best way would be that you can't produce certain units in WG mode. A bit like terran can't produce marauders with reactor. It would help considerably in the late game too when a protoss can't morph archon directly in front your base.
Edit : Actually I just come with this idea, but the more I think about it, the more I think this idea is brillant.
Yeah, like blink stalker. They are scarry because of warpgate not the ability itself. I have read some random suggestion somewhere that they should take templar of the warpgate and buff it's movement a little bit. This kind of thing sound good( at least for terran like me) but it would take a lot of test and i would not hope for this kind of change even in Lotv.
Neh, Blink stalker are cool, even off WG. The problem is that it comes too soon, adding 30s to Blink research would help a lot. Not being able to produce HT and DT from WG but only from gateway would make the game pretty cool, with proxy gate for dt rush and stuff.
The terran whine is so strong these days, as if they think WoL was a balanced game (it was the worst in sc2 history).
They say, get rid of warpgate.. but no mention that they can heal their units (medivacs) or mules that boost their economy for free. The bias is so strong that no wonder DK has little feedback that is actually useful.
On July 24 2014 15:09 Parcelleus wrote: The terran whine is so strong these days, as if they think WoL was a balanced game (it was the worst in sc2 history).
They say, get rid of warpgate.. but no mention that they can heal their units (medivacs) or mules that boost their economy for free. The bias is so strong that no wonder DK has little feedback that is actually useful.
Lol what? Even protoss want a redesign of Warp gate... And TvP WoL was more than balanced, it was also a fun game, with a lot of diversity in midgame. And PvT is far from being balanced now.
On July 24 2014 15:09 Parcelleus wrote: The terran whine is so strong these days, as if they think WoL was a balanced game (it was the worst in sc2 history).
They say, get rid of warpgate.. but no mention that they can heal their units (medivacs) or mules that boost their economy for free. The bias is so strong that no wonder DK has little feedback that is actually useful.
Lol what? Even protoss want a redesign of Warp gate... And TvP WoL was more than balanced, it was also a fun game, with a lot of diversity in midgame. And PvT is far from being balanced now.
lol what ?
They do ? You represent all protoss do you ?
TvP in WoL was a joke. Hence why PO was introduced to fix terran ear;ly game OPness. PvT is much better now than WoL and the stats prove it.
On July 24 2014 11:06 Faust852 wrote: I even wonder if DB ever played the game too. Rob Pardo would have made the best multi competitive game ever, I'm sure of it.
Rob Pardo advocated for Warp Gates, I hear.
I think WG is a cool mechanic. But it's poorly designed.
It's pretty easy to fix. Just make warping in cost more cooldown than producing from regular gateways and it's just fine.
Yeah, it just require a huge amount of balancing and even in LotV it would take ages to make it works. Imho the best way would be that you can't produce certain units in WG mode. A bit like terran can't produce marauders with reactor. It would help considerably in the late game too when a protoss can't morph archon directly in front your base.
Edit : Actually I just come with this idea, but the more I think about it, the more I think this idea is brillant.
That's how Starbow approached it, you can warp in everything except dragoons, which are your all around medium combat unit and necessary in pretty much every MU. I think the idea is worth exploring.
On July 24 2014 15:09 Parcelleus wrote: The terran whine is so strong these days, as if they think WoL was a balanced game (it was the worst in sc2 history).
They say, get rid of warpgate.. but no mention that they can heal their units (medivacs) or mules that boost their economy for free. The bias is so strong that no wonder DK has little feedback that is actually useful.
Lol what? Even protoss want a redesign of Warp gate... And TvP WoL was more than balanced, it was also a fun game, with a lot of diversity in midgame. And PvT is far from being balanced now.
lol what ?
They do ? You represent all protoss do you ?
TvP in WoL was a joke. Hence why PO was introduced to fix terran ear;ly game OPness. PvT is much better now than WoL and the stats prove it.
And you are calling me biased. I don't even want to argue with you. Enjoy easy wins while you still can.
On July 24 2014 11:06 Faust852 wrote: I even wonder if DB ever played the game too. Rob Pardo would have made the best multi competitive game ever, I'm sure of it.
Rob Pardo advocated for Warp Gates, I hear.
I think WG is a cool mechanic. But it's poorly designed.
It's pretty easy to fix. Just make warping in cost more cooldown than producing from regular gateways and it's just fine.
Yeah, it just require a huge amount of balancing and even in LotV it would take ages to make it works. Imho the best way would be that you can't produce certain units in WG mode. A bit like terran can't produce marauders with reactor. It would help considerably in the late game too when a protoss can't morph archon directly in front your base.
Edit : Actually I just come with this idea, but the more I think about it, the more I think this idea is brillant.
That's how Starbow approached it, you can warp in everything except dragoons, which are your all around medium combat unit and necessary in pretty much every MU. I think the idea is worth exploring.
Tbh I never got into the StarBow train but this another good reason to explore this idea if it works on SB.
On July 24 2014 15:09 Parcelleus wrote: The terran whine is so strong these days, as if they think WoL was a balanced game (it was the worst in sc2 history).
They say, get rid of warpgate.. but no mention that they can heal their units (medivacs) or mules that boost their economy for free. The bias is so strong that no wonder DK has little feedback that is actually useful.
Lol what? Even protoss want a redesign of Warp gate... And TvP WoL was more than balanced, it was also a fun game, with a lot of diversity in midgame. And PvT is far from being balanced now.
lol what ?
They do ? You represent all protoss do you ?
TvP in WoL was a joke. Hence why PO was introduced to fix terran ear;ly game OPness. PvT is much better now than WoL and the stats prove it.
And you are calling me biased. I don't even want to argue with you. Enjoy easy wins while you still can.
On July 24 2014 11:06 Faust852 wrote: I even wonder if DB ever played the game too. Rob Pardo would have made the best multi competitive game ever, I'm sure of it.
Rob Pardo advocated for Warp Gates, I hear.
I think WG is a cool mechanic. But it's poorly designed.
It's pretty easy to fix. Just make warping in cost more cooldown than producing from regular gateways and it's just fine.
Yeah, it just require a huge amount of balancing and even in LotV it would take ages to make it works. Imho the best way would be that you can't produce certain units in WG mode. A bit like terran can't produce marauders with reactor. It would help considerably in the late game too when a protoss can't morph archon directly in front your base.
Edit : Actually I just come with this idea, but the more I think about it, the more I think this idea is brillant.
That's how Starbow approached it, you can warp in everything except dragoons, which are your all around medium combat unit and necessary in pretty much every MU. I think the idea is worth exploring.
Tbh I never got into the StarBow train but this another good reason to explore this idea if it works on SB.
On July 23 2014 02:55 Hider wrote: Most interested to see whether WIdow Mine becomes good vs Collosus-based play.
WM is absolutely terrible vs anything until you get the fast digging in skill. Then it's just a matter of high numbers. The splash radius change doesn't change the fact that it's easy to pick off before it fires, and thus you need high numbers of them in a single spot to ensure killing units later in the game. All the races have learned to turn those mines into 1-shot vs the cheapest unit they have or dead before firing lately, so they're often a waste unless you actually mass a lot of them and bury them with speed upgrade.
On July 24 2014 11:06 Faust852 wrote: I even wonder if DB ever played the game too. Rob Pardo would have made the best multi competitive game ever, I'm sure of it.
Rob Pardo advocated for Warp Gates, I hear.
I think WG is a cool mechanic. But it's poorly designed.
It's pretty easy to fix. Just make warping in cost more cooldown than producing from regular gateways and it's just fine.
The only problem with that is that Protoss players would whine and whine. My objection is that a mechanic which makes a race much stronger by virtue of being able to instantly put units anywhere and instantly harass (especially with cloaked units) should take slightly MORE time than the gates that pump units.
Either that, or it should cost 50 minerals a piece to convert a GW into a WG. GW's should cost 200 for the fact of being stronger than their brood war counterpart, but I don't think it's good to make the GW cost 200 straight up, 150 + 50 to WG sounds reasonable.
On July 23 2014 02:55 Hider wrote: Most interested to see whether WIdow Mine becomes good vs Collosus-based play.
WM is absolutely terrible vs anything until you get the fast digging in skill. Then it's just a matter of high numbers. The splash radius change doesn't change the fact that it's easy to pick off before it fires, and thus you need high numbers of them in a single spot to ensure killing units later in the game. All the races have learned to turn those mines into 1-shot vs the cheapest unit they have or dead before firing lately, so they're often a waste unless you actually mass a lot of them and bury them with speed upgrade.
Actually they are good against everything but collossi imo. They are excellent for zoning out the protoss while you attack the 3rd or other stuff. The heavy doomdrop on the main with 6+ WMs near the ramp is cool too ! But yeah, I'll definitly try it against colossus now, but I'm not sure since they target zealot and with the damage up, that my be actually counter intuitive and do huge FF damage. Must try before anyway.
On July 23 2014 02:55 Hider wrote: Most interested to see whether WIdow Mine becomes good vs Collosus-based play.
WM is absolutely terrible vs anything until you get the fast digging in skill. Then it's just a matter of high numbers. The splash radius change doesn't change the fact that it's easy to pick off before it fires, and thus you need high numbers of them in a single spot to ensure killing units later in the game. All the races have learned to turn those mines into 1-shot vs the cheapest unit they have or dead before firing lately, so they're often a waste unless you actually mass a lot of them and bury them with speed upgrade.
Actually they are good against everything but collossi imo. They are excellent for zoning out the protoss while you attack the 3rd or other stuff. The heavy doomdrop on the main with 6+ WMs near the ramp is cool too ! But yeah, I'll definitly try it against colossus now, but I'm not sure since they target zealot and with the damage up, that my be actually counter intuitive and do huge FF damage. Must try before anyway.
They don't really target zealot, just whatever happens to be in proximity, and then it's nearly RNG after that. Get about 20+ with speed dig, and then micro them into an army and bury. Wipes them pretty well. You need about 6-8 early-midgame to do the same trick, however the long bury time makes it mostly only useful for forcing them to micro back or take damage, or some kind of WM/bio all in on their natural before too much colossus gets out.
What kind of numbers do you use when zoning protoss? 99.9% of the time they have observers and get them cleaned up by stalker attacks.
On July 23 2014 02:55 Hider wrote: Most interested to see whether WIdow Mine becomes good vs Collosus-based play.
WM is absolutely terrible vs anything until you get the fast digging in skill. Then it's just a matter of high numbers. The splash radius change doesn't change the fact that it's easy to pick off before it fires, and thus you need high numbers of them in a single spot to ensure killing units later in the game. All the races have learned to turn those mines into 1-shot vs the cheapest unit they have or dead before firing lately, so they're often a waste unless you actually mass a lot of them and bury them with speed upgrade.
Actually they are good against everything but collossi imo. They are excellent for zoning out the protoss while you attack the 3rd or other stuff. The heavy doomdrop on the main with 6+ WMs near the ramp is cool too ! But yeah, I'll definitly try it against colossus now, but I'm not sure since they target zealot and with the damage up, that my be actually counter intuitive and do huge FF damage. Must try before anyway.
They don't really target zealot, just whatever happens to be in proximity, and then it's nearly RNG after that. Get about 20+ with speed dig, and then micro them into an army and bury. Wipes them pretty well. You need about 6-8 early-midgame to do the same trick, however the long bury time makes it mostly only useful for forcing them to micro back or take damage, or some kind of WM/bio all in on their natural before too much colossus gets out.
Yeah but you must agree that since zealot have charge and are in front of the army, they are the one usually targeted.
This patch comes too soon, we don't even know how the meta is affected by the new map pool. If for some reason the new maps are favoring terrans, then this patch will create more imbalance than it solves.
Atm the winning ratio in qualifiers/code A is really not bad for terrans. Are these change needed that much?
Hellbat patch was like what, 2 monthes ago?
And if this patch favors to terrans too much they'll nerf again in 2 monthes?
Blizzard think they're answering the community's concerns, but actually they just create confusion and reinforce the "broken game" feeling some may have because of their lack of consistency overall :'(
On July 24 2014 10:51 Faust852 wrote: I agree with you that units should be weaker in general but the more you miccro them, the best they become. That's the best way to raise the skill ceiling of the game, and it's very impressive from a spectator POV. But you heard what DKim thought about it. It's no use to talk about it because they are blinded by their incompetence and pride. Even now when they say "we are listening to the community", they do !@#$%^&* that aren't that much relevent to the real problems.
Yeh maybe. Though my theory is still this:
- WOL = All devs were relatively ignorant of game-design when this game was released. But over the last 4 years, they have learned alot and should now be more comepetent than ever.
For most of WOL, game was pretty popular and when they developed HOTS they saw no reason to risk messing up what appeared to be a pretty solid game. Further, ppl like DB might also have had a negative influence on some of the unit-designs.
For LOTV, we have David Kim who at least is a decent player and he is responsible for making an expansion to a game where most people wants to see bigger changes. Unlike when HOTS was developed, there isn't as much to lose anymore, so Blizzard might be willing to gamble a bit more.
Again, the gamble here doesn't have to be removal of existing untis or complete redesigns/new races etc. But rather, just looking overall the stats of various units and trying to refine them in order to create new interactions.
I actually don't think it's that time-consuming giving that it's a full-time job, so from a ressource-perspective, it's still within what Blizzard would allow the Sc2-team to spend time on.
Unless i'm reading this wrong, are you saying DK is the lead designer for LOTV? Has this been announced or anything ?
Not having DB as the main man behind the expansion would be the most exciting part for me, as impolite as that might sound.
On July 24 2014 10:51 Faust852 wrote: I agree with you that units should be weaker in general but the more you miccro them, the best they become. That's the best way to raise the skill ceiling of the game, and it's very impressive from a spectator POV. But you heard what DKim thought about it. It's no use to talk about it because they are blinded by their incompetence and pride. Even now when they say "we are listening to the community", they do !@#$%^&* that aren't that much relevent to the real problems.
Yeh maybe. Though my theory is still this:
- WOL = All devs were relatively ignorant of game-design when this game was released. But over the last 4 years, they have learned alot and should now be more comepetent than ever.
For most of WOL, game was pretty popular and when they developed HOTS they saw no reason to risk messing up what appeared to be a pretty solid game. Further, ppl like DB might also have had a negative influence on some of the unit-designs.
For LOTV, we have David Kim who at least is a decent player and he is responsible for making an expansion to a game where most people wants to see bigger changes. Unlike when HOTS was developed, there isn't as much to lose anymore, so Blizzard might be willing to gamble a bit more.
Again, the gamble here doesn't have to be removal of existing untis or complete redesigns/new races etc. But rather, just looking overall the stats of various units and trying to refine them in order to create new interactions.
I actually don't think it's that time-consuming giving that it's a full-time job, so from a ressource-perspective, it's still within what Blizzard would allow the Sc2-team to spend time on.
Unless i'm reading this wrong, are you saying DK is the lead designer for LOTV? Has this been announced or anything ?
Not having DB as the main man behind the expansion would be the most exciting part for me, as impolite as that might sound.
Maybe not officially, but it seems DB is more involved with Heroes of the Storm and that DK has a lot more responsibility for Sc2.
I even wonder if DB ever played the game too. Rob Pardo would have made the best multi competitive game ever, I'm sure of it
Well he probably doesn't play it anymore. But back when he was involved with Sc2 we heard that he started out in diamond, league and then after a couple of months dropped to plat (as other ppl figured out the game). As time went on he was probably not better than Gold when HOTS was released.
On July 24 2014 11:06 Faust852 wrote: I even wonder if DB ever played the game too. Rob Pardo would have made the best multi competitive game ever, I'm sure of it.
Rob Pardo advocated for Warp Gates, I hear.
And WG represents a fantastic mechanic. The problem is it's been made as the be all end all of Protoss production making it more problematic and abusable rather then cool.
Imagine if only the WP could warp in, how cool the WP would have been for Protoss. Having to control multiple WPs around the map to harass (instead of having pylons everywhere). With a much more vulnerable warp in mechanic the gateway units could probably have been stronger to, maybe limiting the death-ball dependence of Protoss armies.
WG could have brought a new dimension to Protoss and introduced micro requirements and not just opportunities.
A good example of how too much of a good thing can turn very bad.
With a much more vulnerable warp in mechanic the gateway units could probably have been stronger to, maybe limiting the death-ball dependence of Protoss armies.
If you buff Gateway units and they become more cost-effective, what happens to the 200/200 deathball cost efficiency of the protoss army? It only gets stronger.
Further, the ability to build pylons around the map also gives protoss strong options for harassmentbased play (as well as timing attacks ofc). Nerfing this option and buffing gateway units them selves would most likely make toss more defensive and more about turtling to max.
Below is my desired solution to protoss warptech/Robo-units/mechanics:
1) Redesign sentries to add countermicrro 2) Nerf Blink stalker in straight up combat, but perhaps increase movemnt speed slightly 3) Reduce cost of Robo Fac from 150/150 to 150/50 4) Give Collosus some synergy with Warp Prism 5) Tweak Immortal so it functions well in the role as a core ranged unit (less DPS, no HS, cheaper and more agile ---> more comparable to a Dragoon). 6) Reduce the DPS but increase HP of Zealots so protoss doesn't rely on Immortals to tank damage, but Zealots clearly have that role.
So what happens here is that the Robo Fac gets a much more central role, and WG units are now worse when massed in straight up engagements. Rather, the role of WG is now down to this:
- Harassmentbased play (zealots, stalker, DT) - Support unit in straight up engagements (Zealots, Sentry) - AA support (Sentry, Blink Stalker)
Protoss timing attacks/all-ins will be worse, harassment based play a bit stronger/unchanged and defenders advantage increased as protoss players will build multiple Robo's earlier in the game.
With a much more vulnerable warp in mechanic the gateway units could probably have been stronger to, maybe limiting the death-ball dependence of Protoss armies.
Well if you think about this again. If you buff Gateway units and they become more cost-effective, what happens to the 200/200 army deathball cost efficiency of the protoss army? It only gets stronger.
Of course. A slight redesign on some units would be in order. Mainly the Colossus i think. Besides, with much more difficult reinforcement, a protoss deathball would be easier to fight against and thus hopefully it would encourage Protoss to split his army in to multiple groups.
Then again, my main problem with the Protoss deathball is not just that it's a blob of units, but how baaaaaaaaad it looks aesthetically. Units on top of units on top of units...unless i'm right near the screen, i can't tell what and how many units are in that mess of colors that's called an army. Imagine how a new comer feels.
If this is the main issue with protoss "deathball", then why are noone criticising a bio-ball? That's clumped up as well.
The main difference - as I see it - is rather that a maxed out toss deathball basically is too unresponsive to be micro'ed during larger engagements. A bio ball, however, can move around extremely fast.
So in order to add more micro to the protoss ball, there are 4 units overall I would look at (besides protoss air).
1) Forcefields replaced by an awesome micro-ability (I think anyone can agree with that)
2) Collosus now synergizies a lot more with Warp-prism micro. I talked about this a couple of pages back, but besides getting rid of AA vulnerbility, you can also reduce cost of Warp Prism so that a protoss player can run around with 3-4 Warp Prism's during battle to protect a larger Collosus count during battle.
3) Immortal needs to be more responsive and it should be easier to pull it back during engagements when it is target fired. In order to do that, the following changes can be made: A) Faster movement speed. B) 0 damage point (doesn't stand still for x seconds when attacking), C) Must not be slowed down by Maurauder grenades.
4) Ideally, Charge also needs to be more microintensive in some way. It would be cool if some type of manual-charge could be implemented to work well.
Further, enemy spells like EMP and Fungal Growth also needs to be relooked at a bit more. It would be a ton more cool if T/Z player could cast those spells against the protoss army, and then the protoss army could split as a response to seeing the spells being casted rather than preempeitvely (or not at all).
For that to occur, Fungal and EMP needs A) Larger AOE and B) Projectile speed reduced to around 8-9 (Fungal currently has 13 I believe). C) Maybe some other type of compensation.
The same concept can be applied to Widow Mines. Zerg can micro against this unit, but it doesn't seem like Protoss can do that much. I think the manual-charge should be designed around adding like of countermicro against the Widow Mine + Collosus should be balanced around not hardcountering Widow Mines as badly.
If this is the main issue with protoss "deathball", then why are noone criticising a bio-ball? That's clumped up as well.
The main difference - as I see it - is rather that a maxed out toss deathball basically is too unresponsive to be micro'ed during larger engagements. A bio ball, however, can move around extremely fast.
You are right, but it's also about the ease of understanding what you are watching. I can see clearly how many of each unit type is in the blob of Terran compositions (even with Zerg).
This is what i have a big problem with from an esports perspective, and the reason i don't watch Protoss. I find it hard on the eye and tiring.
The Protoss maxed out deathball is not just unresponsive to be microed, it is DESIGNED to be auto-pilot one blob army. The more you try to split it the weaker it becomes usually ("it" as in the strategy/play).
Exactly. Tempest is the epitome of the difficulties DB has to make an unit that is not meant to be a hard counter : remember it was supposed to wreck muta balls and ended up being such a brood lord killer it isn't even fun. A very bad unit which even overlapped in some ways on the role a carefully made carrier could have filled.
Protoss air in general is just quite bad. It has multiple units overlapping with each other and micro interactions are very boring/non-existant. Thus, it needs a complete overhaul. Here is what I would do.
My suggestions for protoss air changes in LOTV (warning: long post incoming)
This means that the Tempest can be a relatively mobile unit in the later game that breakes static defense and work for itself.
Void Ray. - Low acceleration - 4 range - More beefy (2 armor, more HP/shield - Leash-range reduced from 2 to around 0.5, so enemy units can actually escape (which should encourage micro).
Due to it's high HP/low range it will synergize well with all other protoss air units, but will be quite medicore in a straihgt up battle asusming the enemy micro's.
Carrier: The Carrier should be an expensive, supply effective unit that can be used to break someone that goes uber turtle. This can be obtained by increasing maximum amount of interceptors it can fire, which makes it stronger but also more expensive as it needs to pay to rebuild intercettrs. Further, as I previously wrote, I would like to see the Thor have more of a Goliath-role here. That means that it's anti-armored attack should be buffed signifciantly while it's antilight/splash attack should be changed somewhat. Further, Vikings are weaker vs armored air units.
Given that the Thor has two modes, why not try and create some actually synergy between those two Thor modes. Wouldn't it be cool if you could switch back and fourth during battles against Carriers?
Actually it is possible (I tested it). What is required are the following changes:
- Carrier's intercetpors are more clumped up (more vulnerable to splash from the Thor) - Interceptors have slightly less HP/more damage - Thor splash damage needs to be a bit larger - Thor transformation time needs to be reduced from 4 seconds to less than 1 second.
This way the terran player wanna target fire the Carriers with the Anti-armored weapon, but if he is good, he can move your injured Thors back behind the other Thors and switch them into anti-splash mode where it targets intercetors instead while keeping the Thors out of the Carriers attack-range.
Oracle. In order to give it moving shot you need to max out it's acceleration and turn-rate + set damage point at 0. For it to be efficient to make the same type of Mutalisk micro vs Marines as saw in BW, the further changes are needed: - Range increased to 6. - Attack speed reduced by 50% - It needs to have less HP/shield (in order to be balanced) - Damage vs light reduced a bit as well. - Seperation radius reduced (so you can stack Oracles better, this is important due to how the Starcraft-editor is bugged as Lalush explained in his "depht of micro"-video.
(FYI: I am not making this up. I spent multiple hours tweaking various stats values in order to get the desired "interaction-effects")
The unit roles
Oracle = Good vs Widow Mine if detected, but weak vs it in the sense that it dies in 1 hit. Vs Vikings it has no answer in straight combat, but has a mobility advantage vs Vikings. Thors are decent vs Oracles. Vs Marines, the outcome depends on micro. 4 marines can take out 1 oracle, but if the Oracle micro's well it can take out 6-7 Marines.
Void Ray. Very strong if enemy doesn't micro, Can tank Marine shots quite well and thus synergizes well with the other higher DPS protoss units. It is good vs Widow Mines in the sense that it can tank multiple shots, but weak vs it since it can't outrange it, has no detection and typically can't fly away from it in time. Vikings are very weak in a straight up engagements vs it, but can kite it.
Tempest: You can get it out in tier2, where you can make some pressure oriented builds with it and take advantage of terrain. It needs to kite vs Marines as it's weak vs them in straight combat, but due to it's slower movement speed it can't kite forever. Further, Widow Mines can catch up to it, but on the other hand it can outrange Widow Mines from a safe distance. In a straight up battle, this is very weak vs Thors, but late game it has a mobility upgrade which means it can take advantage of the immoilbity of the mech-army and haras it. Vikings trade roughly even vs this unit.
Carrier: It's also kinda weak vs the Thor (similar to the Tempest), but there are the following diferences; A) Later tech, B) Slower production, C) Unique micro-interaction, D) much more supply-effective, so if the terran mech player turtles on few bases and has lots of tanks, you cannot finish him off with Tempests, but Carriers can often times be the better job if you have the superior economy
Overall, this should mean that all of protoss air units have unique micro interactions and unique unit roles with various advantages/disadvantage compared to their teran counterparts. There are no hardcounters here as all of the terran "counter"-options have some type of disadvantage against the specific protoss air unit. Instead, the terran player needs to rely on a mix of Thors, Vikings, Mines and Marines to effectively combat a good protoss air player. But I hope that this just functions as an example of how much new gameplay you can create by just changing stats values. You don't need to come in with completley new units or remove old units. For me, it's instead all about the numbers.
Really interesting suggestions, like them a lot especially oracle and carrier interactions I was thinking about air toss for a while and what I would like to see is actually removal of tempest, and redesign void ray to somewhat fill it's role. VR at beginning of sc2 were supposed to be that precise, surgical tool for killing big, key enemy units and right now they just do "terrible, terrible damage" without any specific micro or decision making - you just press 1 key and VR "stim" - I find it quiet lame. I thought about something like leaving VR current dmg as it is and changing how Prismatic Alignment works: * It would be castable ability so you would have to target specific unit with VR that you want to kill faster. * Prismatic Alignment would have higher range (between 1-3) so you would be able to easier target broodlords, collosi etc. protected by units and snipe them (which is the tempest role right now) * it would deal increased dmg, and the dmg would rise with the time as VR is attacking targeted unit. So more hp targeted unit has, more dmg VR can potentially inflict. Also that would mean Prismatic Alignment could be used against ANY unit despite of their armor type and still do at least a bit more dmg than without it which would create some decision making - do I want to use PA now on 1 roach or better to save it in case ultras joins ? * PA is "on" as long as targeted unit is in range so there is no duration of ability. However when targeted unit dies PA goes to cooldown. Additionally if targeted unit leaves the range of PA, void ray losses PA and goes to cooldown - More micro involved against VR than simply disengage for duration of PA as it is right now. * You can cast PA with several VR on the same unit to kill it even faster but as mentioned before it would mean after killing targeted unit VR losses their PA - another decision making - Do I want to kill 1 BL/collosus really fast or rather deal more dmg to several BL/collosi ?
The Protoss maxed out deathball is not just unresponsive to be microed, it is DESIGNED to be auto-pilot one blob army. The more you try to split it the weaker it becomes usually.
Yeh, and that's kinda my point. When units become too unresponsive, your more rewarded for standing still, because if you try and move a unit from one place to another during a battle, then it simply loses to much firepower during a battle. That and ofc the fact that the AOE abilities of the enemy aren't really designed to reward splititng/movement that much. A terran needs to split vs Banelings. Zerg (post-patch at least) needs to split vs Widow Mines. Both of the races have units that are designed around being responsive/mobile enough to split.
Protoss, on the other hand, doesn't really need to split. That's why my approach is to balance protoss around being responsive enough to splitting + create a penalty for not splitting vs AOE abilities.
But if you make the protoss army a lot more around having more Immortals that are more responsive I think the battle-micro will look quite differently. And just imagine more Warp-Prism during engagements. Everyone loves Partings Immortal/WP-micro, and it would be so cool to see increased Collosus/Warp-prim synergy. I think that will just make the spectating experience of seeing toss a ton better.
* It would be castable ability so you would have to target specific unit with VR that you want to kill faster.
That's pretty interesting actually.
The thing that I am always looking (and testing) for with new abilities is whether they add countermicro. I remember back a while ago in late WOL when Qxc had posted a video discussing how many of Sc2 units were boring, and one of his "solutions " was to make hardened shield something you had to activate. Everyone praised him so much and told him he should be hired by Blizzard etc. But almost noone at that point in time thought about the countermicro implications. Like what can a mec-player player do against this? What interesting micro interactions does it add?
Close to zero right, and that's also why I always thought VR alignement never was gonna be interesting in HOTS because it was designed as spam-based ability, not as a countermicro-based ability.
So when I look at your suggested ability, it would seem to me to be a requirement that the enemey should have a realistic chance of escaping with his units that is being targetted by PA + at the same time it should be something that is actually practical and efficient to do. It shouldn't just be a theoretical type of micro that noone ever does.
From my experience, counterbased action can be hard to create in theory. Rather, it's more about going into the Starcraft-editor and refining stats over and over untill you have satifisied two conditions;
1) A penalty to the enemy for not remicro'ing 2) Make it practical/efficient to remicro
So I can't really tell whether it's gonna work or not.
But if I was going to remove one protoss unit from LOTV, it would probably have to be the Void Ray. While I admit it can be relatively interesting if it get's a good spell, the unit it self is very difficult to make micro-intensive. The Tempest on the other hand can at leat get a better moving shot which the control of that unit feel better. And if you come up with a super interesting ability, then the Tempest (or another unit) could get that as well. The Void Ray doesn't have to exist.
I don't get why all people shit on warpgate. Sure it can sometimes be frustrating to play against, but this is what makes Protoss production different and interesting. When I first saw casts of the game -didn't play it at the time- and caught a glimpse of this ability, I was like : "Teleporting units ! That's fucking awesome !" and this is part of why I chose to play Protoss (this plus the fact you don't lose a worker, temporarily or definitely, when building a structure) at a time when Protoss was really not considered overpowered at all.
Honestly I don't see a lot of issues with warpgate nowadays. Introducing a gateway/warpgate duality that's not just "warpgate is better, what are you thinking ?" could be interesting but it needs to be because it introduces some interesting ideas or dynamics rather than just "huh, warpgates so broken, need to make toss noobs think". I haven't seen such ideas yet and always feel the underlying statement is "I hate playing against warpin rounds, so let's make it less good than it is".
Honestly I don't see a lot of issues with warpgate nowadays. Introducing a gateway/warpgate duality that's not just "warpgate is better, what are you thinking ?" could be interesting but it needs to be because it introduces some interesting ideas or dynamics rather than just "huh, warpgates so broken, need to make toss noobs think". I haven't seen such ideas yet and always feel the underlying statement is "I hate playing against warpin rounds, so let's make it less good than it is".
I think it's mainly problematic against zerg because toss has a lot of timings that are just really damn hard to deal with and not fun to play against at all.
* It would be castable ability so you would have to target specific unit with VR that you want to kill faster.
That's pretty interesting actually.
So when I look at your suggested ability, it would seem to me to be a requirement that the enemey should have a realistic chance of escaping with his units that is being targetted by PA + at the same time it should be something that is actually practical and efficient to do. It shouldn't just be a theoretical type of micro that noone ever does.
From my experience, counterbased action can be hard to create in theory. Rather, it's more about going into the Starcraft-editor and refining stats over and over untill you have satifisied two conditions;
1) A penalty to the enemy for remicro'ing 2) Made it practical/efficient to remicro
So I can't really tell whether it's gonna work or not.
But if I was going to remove one protoss unit from LOTV, it would probably have to be the Void Ray. While I admit it can be relatively interesting if it get's a good spell, the unit it self is very difficult to make micro-intensive. The Tempest on the other hand can at leat get a better moving shot which the control of that unit feel better. And if you come up with a super interesting ability, then the Tempest (or another unit) could get that as well. The Void Ray doesn't have to exist.
Well, yes I agree that it is hard to tell if it would work or not just by looking on paper. It should definitely be tested and tweaked in editor. Counterbased micro might be hard to achieve for some units that are just slower than VR's - broodlords come to mind. On the other hand I believe that it would be still easier for zerg's to micro against reworked VR than tempest in it's current form which counterd BL/infestor strat too much. Of course it's not like I want to come back to glorious days of bl/infestor but It would be nice to see some diversity, bl/infestors from time to time in PvZ instead of SH...
What you say about control of tempest vs VR it's true. Tempest are able to be micro'ed in traditional way: shoot - reposition - shoot. However their attack and movement speed is so slow that for me at least doesn't feel nice to micro them in other way that just target fire. Also there is already a lot similar micro (shoot - reposition/move - shoot) in sc2 that I would like to see something new. and btw I always liked the model and animations of VR
On July 24 2014 18:32 [PkF] Wire wrote: I don't get why all people shit on warpgate. Sure it can sometimes be frustrating to play against, but this is what makes Protoss production different and interesting. When I first saw casts of the game -didn't play it at the time- and caught a glimpse of this ability, I was like : "Teleporting units ! That's fucking awesome !" and this is part of why I chose to play Protoss (this plus the fact you don't lose a worker, temporarily or definitely, when building a structure) at a time when Protoss was really not considered overpowered at all.
Honestly I don't see a lot of issues with warpgate nowadays. Introducing a gateway/warpgate duality that's not just "warpgate is better, what are you thinking ?" could be interesting but it needs to be because it introduces some interesting ideas or dynamics rather than just "huh, warpgates so broken, need to make toss noobs think". I haven't seen such ideas yet and always feel the underlying statement is "I hate playing against warpin rounds, so let's make it less good than it is".
It makes the macro "unequal", meaning toss produces units faster than their counterparts.
If the macro is this unequal then its probably hard to make zealot/stalker have a pretty solid strength versus their counterparts: Terran: marine. marauder, medivac etc zerg: roach, zergling, hydra etc
So these races then either needs a super macro themself or some other unit that are really strong initself, like the widowmine.
I want the warpgate gone from a normal macro protoss, perhaps add it to another unit for a spell or something so it can still be used but more in a strategic way~ Now the counterparts doesnt need a super strength unit or a supermacro themself so imo this would make it easier to have a micro war + a macro war against each other.
If you look at protoss, they always get their tier3 units because they are so strong, in a nutshell it means gateway units cant hold in strength over the curse of the game so it never ever becomes a macrowar between x race vs protoss.
Now if it becomes here a macrowar and microwar, then imo its easier to make better unit interactions against each other.
On July 24 2014 18:32 [PkF] Wire wrote: I don't get why all people shit on warpgate. Sure it can sometimes be frustrating to play against, but this is what makes Protoss production different and interesting. When I first saw casts of the game -didn't play it at the time- and caught a glimpse of this ability, I was like : "Teleporting units ! That's fucking awesome !" and this is part of why I chose to play Protoss (this plus the fact you don't lose a worker, temporarily or definitely, when building a structure) at a time when Protoss was really not considered overpowered at all.
Honestly I don't see a lot of issues with warpgate nowadays. Introducing a gateway/warpgate duality that's not just "warpgate is better, what are you thinking ?" could be interesting but it needs to be because it introduces some interesting ideas or dynamics rather than just "huh, warpgates so broken, need to make toss noobs think". I haven't seen such ideas yet and always feel the underlying statement is "I hate playing against warpin rounds, so let's make it less good than it is".
People shit on warpgate because it denies the "defender" advantage and as a result of this mechanic protoss has shitty tier 1 units for the biggest price. Where is the thought that Protoss has the most expensive units and the strongest for the price?!(gone, because WG) Also "we cannot hold" phrase... dafuq? ... OK, that's OT a little
And the biggest problem - it is not a strategical decision, it is just an upgrade decision where - WG is just better, that's it. Which is wrong. There should be some disadvantage in using WG over GW, not otherwise. Then if you are 3/4gating the defender who doesn't use WG has an advantage... now think about it... then we can reduce nexus overcharge, buff wg units(so you can defend against phoenix/muta harass(possibly +light dmg for stalkers)) etc. So MSC can be redesigned(still a problem with retreating in PvZ with the army without recall, but we can return the recall to WoL status - therefore MSC stays at home with awesome time warp ). But noone from Blizzard wants to play with correct settings of WG/GW, so we have just one correct decision.
On July 24 2014 18:32 [PkF] Wire wrote: I don't get why all people shit on warpgate. Sure it can sometimes be frustrating to play against, but this is what makes Protoss production different and interesting. When I first saw casts of the game -didn't play it at the time- and caught a glimpse of this ability, I was like : "Teleporting units ! That's fucking awesome !" and this is part of why I chose to play Protoss (this plus the fact you don't lose a worker, temporarily or definitely, when building a structure) at a time when Protoss was really not considered overpowered at all.
Honestly I don't see a lot of issues with warpgate nowadays. Introducing a gateway/warpgate duality that's not just "warpgate is better, what are you thinking ?" could be interesting but it needs to be because it introduces some interesting ideas or dynamics rather than just "huh, warpgates so broken, need to make toss noobs think". I haven't seen such ideas yet and always feel the underlying statement is "I hate playing against warpin rounds, so let's make it less good than it is".
Mostly because it creates a situation where the defender's advantage is almost irrelevant, and missing or catching a probe can mean the difference between a safe third and just straight up dying. It makes the game feel random and arbitrary.
It also means the basic protoss units have to be pretty bad for their cost since being able to warp in something like BW quality zealots and dragoons would be completely broken, further compounding the extreme dependence protoss has on their big scary gas units.
I think there should be some kind of trade-off, there should be some incentive to use regular gateways over warp gates. Maybe templars and sentries coming from gateways can start with extra energy, and if you warp them in they start with very low or even no energy. Maybe try limiting warp ins by making each round increase the cooldown until you stop warping in to let it "cool down" for a minute or something.
It makes the macro "unequal", meaning toss produces units faster than their counterparts.
Marine build-time is 25s. Zergling build-time is 24s. Zealot cool-down after a warp-in is 28s.
Walking distance Two units the first round
What i meant is either its a faster/better macro than their counterpart or slower Like if its different strength in the macro(either better or worse), then it doesnt become a war.
It's probably because I didn't play BW, but to me warpgate is so much of Protoss identity I'd feel betrayed if I couldn't warp in units any more. When I talk about SCII with friends or family and explain them the different races and try to describe them in a nutshell, the ability to teleport units anywhere you have vision of the battlefield is always one of the things I speak about first and I can tell how awesome it sounds. So I'm pretty adamant the game should be balanced around warpgate for the races to keep their distinctive traits, but that's probably just a matter of taste !
But the change itself seems strange to me. It doesn't change the strong protoss armies in a huge way. Ok lategame is affected a little bit (storm/colossi/timewarp combo), but the firepower itself wasn't reduced by much and was very strong itself in combination with forcefields, even before timewarp was invented.
On July 24 2014 19:09 [PkF] Wire wrote: It's probably because I didn't play BW, but to me warpgate is so much of Protoss identity I'd feel betrayed if I couldn't warp in units any more. When I talk about SCII with friends or family and explain them the different races and try to describe them in a nutshell, the ability to teleport units anywhere you have vision of the battlefield is always one of the things I speak about first and I can tell how awesome it sounds. So I'm pretty adamant the game should be balanced around warpgate for the races to keep their distinctive traits, but that's probably just a matter of taste !
I understand and ypu can! It just requires wg to have a drawback (warp in with no shields, more expensive, takes longer, spells on cooldown, take extra damage while warping, etcetera) just so getting wg is an actual decision and gateways are better. Thua, defenders advantage - better pvp - ff/po can get nerfed - tons of options open up - game more fun and diverse.
If all races produced units like Terran does then this game would be a lot more boring.
Why? Isnt this a bit to much black and white thinking?
If the units behave differently with really great unitinteractions i take that every day in the way over "zealots cant micro" "stalkers suck"
But can't you just have both? It's not really different creating fun unit interactions for a unit relations like 2:1 than it is for 1:1. At the end of the day, you are never going to have "perfect fights", in which the armies do have the perfect cost/supply/power-even unitcounts anyways, so your interactions have to be created robust against "number imbalances" anyways.
Also, people that say stalkers suck have no clue about the game.
I think there should be some kind of trade-off, there should be some incentive to use regular gateways over warp gates. Maybe templars and sentries coming from gateways can start with extra energy, and if you warp them in they start with very low or even no energy. Maybe try limiting warp ins by making each round increase the cooldown until you stop warping in to let it "cool down" for a minute or something.
So I kinda see this as the "naive" game-designers dream. This dream consist of wanting to create tradeoffs everywhere in order to create as many decisions as possible into the game. The warptech/gateway-tradeoff reminds me a lot of the debate when Speedmedivacs were introduced as people wanted to have a cost to the usage of the speed-boost.
The reason why I called this line of thought naive is that it ignores whether the added "decisions" makes gameplay more fun over the longer haul.
The main question that should be asked for Speedmedivac was whether restricting terrans from using the speedboost would make the game more fun to play. I always spoke against that as would be a nerf to dropplay + a nerf to pickup units after a battle and then escape them. Overall that would lead to more passive play. And while making Starcraft more decisions-based (at the expense of mechanics/gameplay) perhaps can make the game interesting for a week or two, the optimal usage of the "decisions"-based abilities will be figured out quite quickly and then the game will be quite unfun.
So add decision into the game if it will create new dynamics and interactions that have potential to be fun even when the game is figured out. But don't add decisions at the exepense of gameplay.
The parallels I draw here to warptech and gateway is that I do not think it's fun at all to switch back and fourth between WG and Gateways. If that really was the case every protoss player in Starbow would just do that all the time. But noone really seems to be willing to learn that even though it theoretically has clear advantages.
Further, it doesn't even add any unique mechanics to protoss. Protoss already has the decision behind a normal productionfacilitiy in the Robo and the "instant" production facility in WG. WG's doesn't need to have a "normal" option as well - That will just make it overlap more with the way Robotics Facility works.
Rather, I suggest to make the Robo cheaper and then create a real decision behind how many robo's you want relative to warpgates. While this suggestion mainly is due to gameplay reasons, it does also create a more interesting tradeoff as well.
If all races produced units like Terran does then this game would be a lot more boring.
Why? Isnt this a bit to much black and white thinking?
If the units behave differently with really great unitinteractions i take that every day in the way over "zealots cant micro" "stalkers suck"
But can't you just have both? It's not really different creating fun unit interactions for a unit relations like 2:1 than it is for 1:1. At the end of the day, you are never going to have "perfect fights", in which the armies do have the perfect cost/supply/power-even unitcounts anyways, so your interactions have to be created robust against "number imbalances" anyways.
Also, people that say stalkers suck have no clue about the game.
Ye? Sure. But getting x and y vs x and y beeing "equal" would be easier.
Getting it 1:1 in one versus one is probably hard, yes. But getting 1:1 in two versus two or three versus two etc is probably easier. Atleast closer with "equal" macro against each other.
My opinion is that stalker is a pretty weak unit, yes. I know about this supply effecient versus zerg but that comes later, much later. Versus terran however, he is plain bad overall in fighting power. And i cant care less if stalker is strong later in the game, its still a shitty boring unit for me with his boring blink.
Yes, my opinion, boring ability yet its a strong ability initself.
Also, you truly believe a warpgate like this is possible to get it "right"? Two units the first round, no walking distance, can morph from a pylon which can be built anywhere.
28sec cooldown on the zealot+5sec warpin. CB can reduce the cooldown by 10sec~ .
Imo the best/most simple way to solve the defenders advantage problem with warpgate and to give a valid choice between gateways and warpgate is to make it so that warped in units start with no shields whereas units produced from gateways have full shields. This means that reinforcing an attack is not going to be as effective because your units are going to be weaker until their shields come online so attacks cannot snowball as easily and also means that protoss are punished for not having units in position to defend defensively (sure you can warp in a bunch of zealots to defend a drop, but if you do then they are not as strong as if you had had them in position beforehand and gained their shields).
This would help with PvP as well because there is a major defenders advantage to having units produced with gateways with shields as opposed to units produced wiith warpgate without shields. This means that the mothership core and photon overcharge can be changed to not ruin games. I don't know why this wasn't done ages ago.
Ye? Sure. But getting x and y vs x and y beeing "equal" would be easier.
Doesn't this apply to zerg as well? Zerg can in various phases of the game completley outproduce it's opponent.
Yes. I obviously wanna change the creep speed effect and the inject.
But in this case your looking to solve a macromechanic issue by tweaking stats. Wouldn't it be possible to apply the same reasoning to protoss production?
On July 24 2014 19:35 Goofinator wrote: Imo the best/most simple way to solve the defenders advantage problem with warpgate and to give a valid choice between gateways and warpgate is to make it so that warped in units start with no shields whereas units produced from gateways have full shields. This means that reinforcing an attack is not going to be as effective because your units are going to be weaker until their shields come online so attacks cannot snowball as easily and also means that protoss are punished for not having units in position to defend defensively (sure you can warp in a bunch of zealots to defend a drop, but if you do then they are not as strong as if you had had them in position beforehand and gained their shields).
This would help with PvP as well because there is a major defenders advantage to having units produced with gateways with shields as opposed to units produced wiith warpgate without shields. This means that the mothership core and photon overcharge can be changed to not ruin games. I don't know why this wasn't done ages ago.
You can't do that, cause then reactored buildings become OP vs this in midgame. Also queen injects would then need to be atuned. No reasson to fix the issue where it doesnt exists. Only thing terran needs is 1-2 buffs to it's late game units, not sure which but i am cheering for tank.
On July 24 2014 19:35 Goofinator wrote: Imo the best/most simple way to solve the defenders advantage problem with warpgate and to give a valid choice between gateways and warpgate is to make it so that warped in units start with no shields whereas units produced from gateways have full shields. This means that reinforcing an attack is not going to be as effective because your units are going to be weaker until their shields come online so attacks cannot snowball as easily and also means that protoss are punished for not having units in position to defend defensively (sure you can warp in a bunch of zealots to defend a drop, but if you do then they are not as strong as if you had had them in position beforehand and gained their shields).
This would help with PvP as well because there is a major defenders advantage to having units produced with gateways with shields as opposed to units produced wiith warpgate without shields. This means that the mothership core and photon overcharge can be changed to not ruin games. I don't know why this wasn't done ages ago.
So you want: A) PO to be nerfed B) Warptech to be nerfed both offensively and defensively,
How is protoss gonna be compensated here? How is protoss gonna defend various harass/pressure-plays? If you suggest you can balance it by buffing WG-units, doesn't that also just imply that protoss 200/200 ball is stronger?
So from my perspective, it looks as if this solution creates multiple new issues that needs to be adressed. That's why I belive my solution is a ton simpler, becasue it buffs protoss in one way and nerfs it in another while still creating a larger defenders advantage wihtout buffing the 200/200 ball:
A) Protoss gets buffed by Robo-tech being more accessible. B) Protoss gets nerfed by a slight weakning of the combat stats of WG-units --> effectively increases defenders advantage.
Ye? Sure. But getting x and y vs x and y beeing "equal" would be easier.
Doesn't this apply to zerg as well? Zerg can in various phases of the game completley outproduce it's opponent.
Yes. I obviously wanna change the creep speed effect and the inject.
But in this case your looking to solve a macromechanic issue by tweaking stats. Wouldn't it be possible to apply the same reasoning to protoss production?
Yes. Its a bit trickier but yes, its possible for certain most likely
If all races produced units like Terran does then this game would be a lot more boring.
Why? Isnt this a bit to much black and white thinking?
If the units behave differently with really great unitinteractions i take that every day in the way over "zealots cant micro" "stalkers suck"
But can't you just have both? It's not really different creating fun unit interactions for a unit relations like 2:1 than it is for 1:1. At the end of the day, you are never going to have "perfect fights", in which the armies do have the perfect cost/supply/power-even unitcounts anyways, so your interactions have to be created robust against "number imbalances" anyways.
Also, people that say stalkers suck have no clue about the game.
Ye? Sure. But getting x and y vs x and y beeing "equal" would be easier.
Getting it 1:1 in one versus one is probably hard, yes. But getting 1:1 in two versus two or three versus two etc is probably easier. Atleast closer with "equal" macro against each other.
My opinion is that stalker is a pretty weak unit, yes. I know about this supply effecient versus zerg but that comes later, much later. Versus terran however, he is plain bad overall in fighting power. And i cant care less if stalker is strong later in the game, its still a shitty boring unit for me with his boring blink.
Yes, my opinion, boring ability yet its a strong ability initself.
Also, you truly believe a warpgate like this is possible to get it "right"? Two units the first round, no walking distance, can morph from a pylon which can be built anywhere.
28sec cooldown on the zealot+5sec warpin. CB can reduce the cooldown by 10sec~ .
Maybe you are clueless about the game?
Of course the stalker is weak in fighting power, when it can shoot ground+air and is fast+has blink+has massive health regeneration. That doesn't make the unit suck. It just loses to the most powerful early game combat units, which is the purpose of a powerful early game combat units in plain fights.
Warpgate isn't that bad for the game. It gives Protoss pretty fun harassment capabilities that they wouldn't have against bio and zerg. The only bigger issue with it is the endless amounts of timing attacks it creates in the early game, which could be solved quite easily by delaying the tech or by nerfing the cooldown times of warpgate units. Yes, of course 28seconds for a 100/0 unit from a 150/0 production facility when that race also has CB available is quite a strong production mechanic, when a Terran needs a 200/50 facility to produce a 100/0 costequivalent in 25seconds. Which is a problem of production time/gateway costs.
Of course you can pin it on the warp-ins, you can also pin it on a lot of other things. If I was to create a warpgate myself, I surely wouldn't put a stalker or HT/Archon type of unit on it. I would make it much more limited in terms of what it can produce, just like you don't put a siege tank on a techlabbed barracks or how you don't let Zerg open with Terrain-ignoring, combatcapable mutalisks at 7mins.
Of course you can pin it on the warp-ins, you can also pin it on a lot of other things. If I was to create a warpgate myself, I surely wouldn't put a stalker or HT/Archon type of unit on it. I would make it much more limited in terms of what it can produce, just like you don't put a siege tank on a techlabbed barracks or how you don't let Zerg open with Terrain-ignoring, combatcapable mutalisks at 7mins.
Yeh, I actually look at warptech as having paralels to how Mech works.
If we look at mech it has the very mobile, easy to replenish, harassfocussed Hellions which functions as support during battles. And then the backbone consist of Siege Tanks/thors which takes a longer time to produce and is less mobile.
WG-units should ideally be comparable to Hellions. Should support the backbone units during the battle while offering harass opportunities during the rest of the game. The backbone = Robo-units.
But the thing that kinda went wrong for Toss designwise in Sc2 was that toss can do too strong timing-attacks without the backbone/with minimal usage of it (plus ofc that the design of the backbone units them selves is pretty bad).
That's why, if anything, Stalkers are too strong atm. If they were weaker in straight combats (but had a different advantage), protoss would need to rely more on the backbone (robo units) to win straight up engagements.
On July 24 2014 19:35 Goofinator wrote: Imo the best/most simple way to solve the defenders advantage problem with warpgate and to give a valid choice between gateways and warpgate is to make it so that warped in units start with no shields whereas units produced from gateways have full shields. This means that reinforcing an attack is not going to be as effective because your units are going to be weaker until their shields come online so attacks cannot snowball as easily and also means that protoss are punished for not having units in position to defend defensively (sure you can warp in a bunch of zealots to defend a drop, but if you do then they are not as strong as if you had had them in position beforehand and gained their shields).
This would help with PvP as well because there is a major defenders advantage to having units produced with gateways with shields as opposed to units produced wiith warpgate without shields. This means that the mothership core and photon overcharge can be changed to not ruin games. I don't know why this wasn't done ages ago.
So you want: A) PO to be nerfed B) Warptech to be nerfed both offensively and defensively,
How is protoss gonna be compensated here? How is protoss gonna defend various harass/pressure-plays? If you suggest you can balance it by buffing WG-units, doesn't that also just imply that protoss 200/200 ball is stronger?
So from my perspective, it looks as if this solution creates multiple new issues that needs to be adressed. That's why I belive my solution is a ton simpler, becasue it buffs protoss in one way and nerfs it in another while still creating a larger defenders advantage wihtout buffing the 200/200 ball:
A) Protoss gets buffed by Robo-tech being more accessible. B) Protoss gets nerfed by a slight weakning of the combat stats of WG-units --> effectively increases defenders advantage.
I don't think Protoss would need to be compensated, they would just need to learn how to play RTS by actually having units in position and ahead of time.
I think there should be some kind of trade-off, there should be some incentive to use regular gateways over warp gates. Maybe templars and sentries coming from gateways can start with extra energy, and if you warp them in they start with very low or even no energy. Maybe try limiting warp ins by making each round increase the cooldown until you stop warping in to let it "cool down" for a minute or something.
So I kinda see this as the "naive" game-designers dream. This dream consist of wanting to create tradeoffs everywhere in order to create as many decisions as possible into the game. The warptech/gateway-tradeoff reminds me a lot of the debate when Speedmedivacs were introduced as people wanted to have a cost to the usage of the speed-boost.
The reason why I called this line of thought naive is that it ignores whether the added "decisions" makes gameplay more fun over the longer haul.
The main question that should be asked for Speedmedivac was whether restricting terrans from using the speedboost would make the game more fun to play. I always spoke against that as would be a nerf to dropplay + a nerf to pickup units after a battle and then escape them. Overall that would lead to more passive play. And while making Starcraft more decisions-based (at the expense of mechanics/gameplay) perhaps can make the game interesting for a week or two, the optimal usage of the "decisions"-based abilities will be figured out quite quickly and then the game will be quite unfun.
So add decision into the game if it will create new dynamics and interactions that have potential to be fun even when the game is figured out. But don't add decisions at the exepense of gameplay.
The parallels I draw here to warptech and gateway is that I do not think it's fun at all to switch back and fourth between WG and Gateways. If that really was the case every protoss player in Starbow would just do that all the time. But noone really seems to be willing to learn that even though it theoretically has clear advantages.
Further, it doesn't even add any unique mechanics to protoss. Protoss already has the decision behind a normal productionfacilitiy in the Robo and the "instant" production facility in WG. WG's doesn't need to have a "normal" option as well - That will just make it overlap more with the way Robotics Facility works.
Rather, I suggest to make the Robo cheaper and then create a real decision behind how many robo's you want relative to warpgates. While this suggestion mainly is due to gameplay reasons, it does also create a more interesting tradeoff as well.
Maybe I should have clarified, in addition to creating incentives to use regular warp gates, there should be a straight up nerf to WG, which could allow for some other interesting options as well, even tinkering with the t1 protoss units. That is something that would make for actual decisions, warp in here and risk having the production on cooldown, or crank out units faster from the regular gateway. Being able to teleport units in a massive strong ability, and the choice between warping in and building normally could absolutely be both interesting and significant. It just takes a carefully balanced trade off between the two.
Furthermore, that decision will be highly fluid, it will depend on maps, on economy, on the enemy unit comp, on your unit comp etc, there are so many variables to a choice between WG and gateway, assuming there is a realistic choice in the first place, that I strongly doubt there will ever be a one-size-fits-all answer to whether to warp in or not. The medivac analogy does not hold up, the speedboost only ever serves a single purpose, a WG vs gateway dynamic is much more dynamic, the choice changes constantly.
As for promoting heavier robo play, that is plausible, but that runs into the brick wall of protoss robo units being so hugely powerful, again as a direct result of their T1 units being rather bad. If we want to make multiple robo builds a more standard thing, we can't leave the units as they are. The idea of weakening t1 protoss units further is something I very strongly disagree with, protoss does not need to lean or their t2-3 gas units any more than they already do. If anything we should be looking to do the opposite.
That is something that would make for actual decisions, warp in here and risk having the production on cooldown, or crank out units faster from the regular gateway.
No I understood you fully, and that is how you create a tradeoff: You add risks/downsides to decisions, but that isn't interesting in it self. Let me try to use a real-world example to illustrate my point. Let's say I go out to buy groceries and has the options between buying some healthy food that tastes kinda medicoore and some snacks that taste really well, but isn't healthy. Do I really say, wow this tradeoff is so interesting, thank you god/evolution/science for making the world this way. Or wouldn't I prefer that snacks both tasted better and was more healthy at the same time?
The latter is IMO a superior scenario and thus my point is that if there is a tradeoff between boring options and fun options as a replacement for only having a fun option, then adding the tradeoff isn't good.
I don't belive that switching back-and-fouth between Warp-tech and Gateway is ever gonna be something that will be considered fun. I draw parallels to when I as a terran sees Ultralisks and need to lift up my reactor-barracks, and then find some space so I can rebuild them with techlabs. You could argue here that this is a decisoin between me continuing to continue to pump out faster Marines or choosing to invest in techlabs so i can build the more cost-effective Maurauders. But in fact, it's super boring to execute this type of tradeoff and the decision is quite trivial as well. (most decision typically are).
That is something that would make for actual decisions, warp in here and risk having the production on cooldown, or crank out units faster from the regular gateway.
But this is kinda my point. When your adding risks your creating a tradeoff, but that isn't interesting in it self. Let me try to use a real-world example to illustrate my point. Let's say I go out to buy groceries and has the options between buying some healthy food that tastes kinda medicoore and some snakcs that taste really well, but isn't healthy. Do I really say, wow this tradeoff is so interesting, thank you god/evolution/science for making the world this way. Or wouldn't I prefer that snacks both tasted better and was more healthy at the same time?
The latter is IMO a superior scenario and thus my point is that if there is a tradeoff between boring options and fun options as a replacement for only having a fun option, then adding the tradeoff isn't good.
I find this argument very strange. Races are supposed to have weaknesses. Just because something is fun to play with does not mean it's good for the game. Again, your analogy is bad. There is no downside to a meal that is both healthy and tasty. There are definite downsides to elements in games that may be fun, but have deleterious effect on the game as a whole.
And arguing about whether something is fun or boring is fallacious either way, fun is subjective. I think a WG/gateway dynamic is a lot more interesting and fun than just WG.
I think there should be some kind of trade-off, there should be some incentive to use regular gateways over warp gates. Maybe templars and sentries coming from gateways can start with extra energy, and if you warp them in they start with very low or even no energy. Maybe try limiting warp ins by making each round increase the cooldown until you stop warping in to let it "cool down" for a minute or something.
So I kinda see this as the "naive" game-designers dream. This dream consist of wanting to create tradeoffs everywhere in order to create as many decisions as possible into the game. The warptech/gateway-tradeoff reminds me a lot of the debate when Speedmedivacs were introduced as people wanted to have a cost to the usage of the speed-boost.
The reason why I called this line of thought naive is that it ignores whether the added "decisions" makes gameplay more fun over the longer haul.
The main question that should be asked for Speedmedivac was whether restricting terrans from using the speedboost would make the game more fun to play. I always spoke against that as would be a nerf to dropplay + a nerf to pickup units after a battle and then escape them. Overall that would lead to more passive play. And while making Starcraft more decisions-based (at the expense of mechanics/gameplay) perhaps can make the game interesting for a week or two, the optimal usage of the "decisions"-based abilities will be figured out quite quickly and then the game will be quite unfun.
So add decision into the game if it will create new dynamics and interactions that have potential to be fun even when the game is figured out. But don't add decisions at the exepense of gameplay.
The parallels I draw here to warptech and gateway is that I do not think it's fun at all to switch back and fourth between WG and Gateways. If that really was the case every protoss player in Starbow would just do that all the time. But noone really seems to be willing to learn that even though it theoretically has clear advantages.
Further, it doesn't even add any unique mechanics to protoss. Protoss already has the decision behind a normal productionfacilitiy in the Robo and the "instant" production facility in WG. WG's doesn't need to have a "normal" option as well - That will just make it overlap more with the way Robotics Facility works.
Rather, I suggest to make the Robo cheaper and then create a real decision behind how many robo's you want relative to warpgates. While this suggestion mainly is due to gameplay reasons, it does also create a more interesting tradeoff as well.
Maybe I should have clarified, in addition to creating incentives to use regular warp gates, there should be a straight up nerf to WG, which could allow for some other interesting options as well, even tinkering with the t1 protoss units. That is something that would make for actual decisions, warp in here and risk having the production on cooldown, or crank out units faster from the regular gateway. Being able to teleport units in a massive strong ability, and the choice between warping in and building normally could absolutely be both interesting and significant. It just takes a carefully balanced trade off between the two.
Furthermore, that decision will be highly fluid, it will depend on maps, on economy, on the enemy unit comp, on your unit comp etc, there are so many variables to a choice between WG and gateway, assuming there is a realistic choice in the first place, that I strongly doubt there will ever be a one-size-fits-all answer to whether to warp in or not.
As for promoting heavier robo play, that is plausible, but that runs into the brick wall of protoss robo units being so hugely powerful, again as a direct result of their T1 units being rather bad. If we want to make multiple robo builds a more standard thing, we can't leave the units as they are. The idea of weakening t1 protoss units further is something I very strongly disagree with, protoss does not need to lean or their t2-3 gas units any more than they already do. If anything we should be looking to do the opposite.
Well, if you do not want to work on redesigning robo or stargate tech or whatever should be the backbone of the combat army, I think a reasonable starting point would be to just make it impossible to warp-in certain gateway units, but leave them queueable on the warpgate after transformation. (with a production speed matching the one of warpgate). These kinds of units would basically be "hybrids" between gateway- and robotech, as in, they don't require a different production facility, but they still were massable from a cheap production structure. Obviously, there would arise the need to find a way that prevents queuing the one unit, while warping in the other and thereby just doubling the production capability of warpgates. But I think one could come up with something, e.g. a simple idea would be that after a warpin, everything that is being queued goes on halt for the cooldown of the warpin and after a unit finishes, all warpins go on cooldown. Again, this would be a starting point. It would obviously be a large nerf to what Protoss can do right now and need an evaluation to see what would need to be done to make up for that.
That is something that would make for actual decisions, warp in here and risk having the production on cooldown, or crank out units faster from the regular gateway.
But this is kinda my point. When your adding risks your creating a tradeoff, but that isn't interesting in it self. Let me try to use a real-world example to illustrate my point. Let's say I go out to buy groceries and has the options between buying some healthy food that tastes kinda medicoore and some snakcs that taste really well, but isn't healthy. Do I really say, wow this tradeoff is so interesting, thank you god/evolution/science for making the world this way. Or wouldn't I prefer that snacks both tasted better and was more healthy at the same time?
The latter is IMO a superior scenario and thus my point is that if there is a tradeoff between boring options and fun options as a replacement for only having a fun option, then adding the tradeoff isn't good.
I find this argument very strange. Races are supposed to have weaknesses. Just because something is fun to play with does not mean it's good for the game. Again, your analogy is bad. There is no downside to a meal that is both healthy and tasty. There are definite downsides to elements in games what may be fun, but have deleterious effect on the game as a whole.
And arguing about whether something is fun or boring is fallacious either way, fun is subjective. I think a WG/gateway dynamic is a lot more interesting and fun than just WG.
Yes races have downsides:
Warptech = Weaker units, faster production Robo = Stronger units but slower production.
The different types of combinations and strategies you can apply through mixing these units together are interesting becasue it adds variety to gameplay. This type of variety makes the game more fun to watch long-term.
What does a player switching back and forth add to the experience? If this was implemented, then the first couple of times you watched pros' do it, you would say "wow cool". But after a while, you wouldn't care as the units, the micro, the multitasking are still the same.
Another example: First time you see a terran going 3 reaper opening vs zerg, you might say: That's pretty interesting. Then you see it more times and the excitement is gone. All you care about afterwards is whether the 3-Reaper opening leads to better gameplay than a 2-Reaper opening.
But the variety between 3Reaper openings and 2Reaper openings isn't interesting. The opponents reacts similarly and micro interactions are the same. What kind of new interactions does the tradeoff between WG and Gateways make?
Your example with techlab rax and gateways is terrible. With techlab rax you have to actually be in the base to manage the add-ons (if you are switching them around) whereas if you wanted to switch from gateways to warpgate all you need to do is press two keys, one to select the gateways and second to transform them. It is very simple and would add depth - playing defensive? Use gateways so you have shields. Want to reinforce a timing attack? Use warpgate to try and mass the units to win the game (and micro your units so your low shield units are at the back replenishing their shields).
On July 24 2014 20:33 Goofinator wrote: Your example with techlab rax and gateways is terrible. With techlab rax you have to actually be in the base to manage the add-ons (if you are switching them around) whereas if you wanted to switch from gateways to warpgate all you need to do is press two keys, one to select the gateways and second to transform them. It is very simple and would add depth - playing defensive? Use gateways so you have shields. Want to reinforce a timing attack? Use warpgate to try and mass the units to win the game (and micro your units so your low shield units are at the back replenishing their shields).
To switch back to Warptech you have to cancel out all your exisitng production just like when you want to build barracks with techlab. Then you press G, and waits X seconds, then you can start warping in again.
My point is here: This isn't a fun mechanic at all, and the decision it creates won't have any longlasting charm.
That is something that would make for actual decisions, warp in here and risk having the production on cooldown, or crank out units faster from the regular gateway.
But this is kinda my point. When your adding risks your creating a tradeoff, but that isn't interesting in it self. Let me try to use a real-world example to illustrate my point. Let's say I go out to buy groceries and has the options between buying some healthy food that tastes kinda medicoore and some snakcs that taste really well, but isn't healthy. Do I really say, wow this tradeoff is so interesting, thank you god/evolution/science for making the world this way. Or wouldn't I prefer that snacks both tasted better and was more healthy at the same time?
The latter is IMO a superior scenario and thus my point is that if there is a tradeoff between boring options and fun options as a replacement for only having a fun option, then adding the tradeoff isn't good.
I find this argument very strange. Races are supposed to have weaknesses. Just because something is fun to play with does not mean it's good for the game. Again, your analogy is bad. There is no downside to a meal that is both healthy and tasty. There are definite downsides to elements in games what may be fun, but have deleterious effect on the game as a whole.
And arguing about whether something is fun or boring is fallacious either way, fun is subjective. I think a WG/gateway dynamic is a lot more interesting and fun than just WG.
Yes races have downsides:
Warptech = Weaker units, faster production Robo = Stronger units but slower production.
The different types of combinations and strategies you can apply through mixing these units together are interesting becasue it adds variety to gameplay. This type of variety makes the game more fun to watch long-term.
What does a player switching back and forth add to the experience? If this was implemented, then the first couple of times you watched pros' do it, you would say "wow cool". But after a while, you wouldn't care as the units, the micro, the multitasking are still the same.
It adds things by allowing changes in other areas. This is what you're missing, you seem completely focused on the WG mechanic itself. By reducing its impact on the game, it opens up opportunities to change other things, like protoss t1-t2/3 power curve.
I just don't see WG being an inherently good or fun mechanic, it should not be treated as something that is just presumed to be better for the game than gateway production. I think watching a pro player balance WG and gateway production to maximize production while also harassing and warping in defensively adds a lot. It adds an extra layer of skill, and increases the mechanical requirements for playing protoss at the highest level. I see very little of interest in watching a bunch of super-charged robo units walk around in a clump. Making t1 protoss more relevant throughout the game sounds a lot more appealing than making robo play more prevalent, especially since protoss robo units are in my opinion incredibly uninspired.
Again, your reaper example is just bad. The reaper is relevant for the first few minutes, after which the game segues into the mid and late game. A WG vs Gateway dynamic would be relevant the entire game, and likely change as the game progressed. I'm having some troubles with your analogies dude, they are not very persuasive.
My point is here: This isn't a fun mechanic at all, and the decision it creates won't have any longlasting charm.
You have absolutely zero basis for making this claim. Do not claim knowledge you do not possess.
It adds things by allowing changes in other areas. This is what you're missing, you seem completely focused on the WG mechanic itself. By reducing its impact on the game, it opens up opportunities to change other things, like protoss t1-t2/3 power curve.
How can I be missing this once I in all my other posts argued for the effects that changes to WG would have
I just don't see WG being an inherently good or fun mechanic, it should not be treated as something that is just presumed to be better for the game than gateway production. I
I agree with this. It all depends on how you design the game around it. But point is, how does your suggested tradeoff to WG makes it possible to rebalance the game in a better way that my suggested change doesn't. I specifically explained how my (relatively simple) changes affects dynamics. So why would anyone opt for a much more complicated solution that requires larger rebalances to work?
Again, your reaper example is just bad. The reaper is relevant for the first few minutes, after which the game segues into the mid and late game. A WG vs Gateway dynamic would be relevant the entire game, and likely change as the game progressed. I'm having some troubles with your analogies dude, they are not very persuasive.
That's missing the point quite signifciantly. You see the Reaper in the early game, but it's never a "fun" decision at any point in time. So my point here isn't that the Reaper is boring becasue it doesn't work late game, but that it is "pointless" decision when it occurs.
But we can go on to a mid/later game scenario: Is it fun when a terran player mixes in 60% of Maurauders in his bio composition instead of 30%? If your a bit of an Sc2-nerd, that might be interesting to watch the first time, but once again, it just gets trivial. The decision behind the mix of Maurauders and Marines isn't interesting in itself if it doesn't result in any different micro-interactions.
The answer you haven't explaind yet is how the dynamics in anyway become better with this change.
You have absolutely zero basis for making this claim. Do not claim knowledge you do not possess.
But I do. It exists in Starbow and Onegoal. I tried it, it wasn't fun. Noone in Starbow is consistently trying to use it even though it has clear theoretical advantages as I pointed out previosuly. If it really was so fun, you would see a lot more players devoting their actions to try and get this to work, but people just have better things to do. That's why I call it the naive game-designers dream, because multiple people think highly of this theoretically, but it just doens't work in practice.
And as I wrote above: I listed out the actual things you were doing in the proces, which should make it quite obvious that the exceution itself is boring. What you do is: Cancel unit production, press a button and then wait X seconds before you can warp-in. What's the fun part here?
On July 24 2014 09:57 plogamer wrote: What if Thors could attack both air and ground at the same time? Fuck the mine buff, let's see some thors be -really- useful. They can more reliably fill the role of marines for mech - busting open ground units with thor hammers while simultaneously supporting vikings with their ground-to-air splash. Also solves the ridiculous issue of thor target priority.
Limit it so that thors have to face the direction theyre shooting, so there isn't a thor shooting an ultra in the front and a mutalisk in the back. With their clunky movement and turn-rate, they should lose a lot of effectiveness when flanked. So they'll be stronger defensively; holding frontal all-ins from Zergs and follow-up nastification that is constant tech switching.
It could come as an upgrade or an automatic unlock when Terrans build fusion core or something that opens up late-game.
I would prefer a switch towards a thor with two different modes: anti air and anti ground. You could buff the anti air mode a bit to make it really good at dealing with mutas or other mass air threats. Changing back to anti ground mode should take around the same time as siegeing a tank. Doing it mid battle would be bad.
On July 24 2014 20:33 Goofinator wrote: Your example with techlab rax and gateways is terrible. With techlab rax you have to actually be in the base to manage the add-ons (if you are switching them around) whereas if you wanted to switch from gateways to warpgate all you need to do is press two keys, one to select the gateways and second to transform them. It is very simple and would add depth - playing defensive? Use gateways so you have shields. Want to reinforce a timing attack? Use warpgate to try and mass the units to win the game (and micro your units so your low shield units are at the back replenishing their shields).
Have you played with it? Hider and I have in Starbow. They tried for years to get this kind of trade-off system right. It's a nice idea. But it's mechanically boring to press buttons 20seconds in advance, so you can warp-in. Even more it is inefficient, to stop production, and then transform just so that you then realize that you actually don't want to warp in at your warp prism, because there are hydralisks already chasing it. And at the end of the day, unless the production malus is huge, people are just going to build another warpgate for 150/0. At which point, you are often just better off not using warpgate at all, because it makes you soooo weak, to do a warpin and then not being able to produce for like 40-50seconds.
It adds things by allowing changes in other areas. This is what you're missing, you seem completely focused on the WG mechanic itself. By reducing its impact on the game, it opens up opportunities to change other things, like protoss t1-t2/3 power curve.
How can I be missing this once I in all my other posts argued for the effects that changes to WG would have
I just don't see WG being an inherently good or fun mechanic, it should not be treated as something that is just presumed to be better for the game than gateway production. I
I agree with this. It all depends on how you design the game around it. But point is, how does your suggested tradeoff to WG makes it possible to rebalance the game in a better way that my suggested change doesn't.
I've said it like three times now, it let's us look at protoss t1 vs t2/3, and the ridiculous power curve we find there. It could potentially allow changes that smooth out that curve and make protoss basic units more relevant for longer.
The answer you haven't explaind yet is how the dynamics in anyway become better with this change.
The obvious answer is that I have absolutely no idea, and neither do you, or anyone else here. I said it was an avenue worth exploring. Could be it turns out to be awful. I think it works pretty well in Starbow, which is similar enough that some parallels can be drawn.
Also, I'm getting a little tired of repeating myself when it comes to explaining how it could improve the game by letting protoss have better t1 units.
I've said it like three times now, it let's us look at protoss t1 vs t2/3, and the ridiculous power curve we find there. It could potentially allow changes that smooth out that curve and make protoss basic units more relevant for longer.
Okay, sorry I missed that part. So let's focus the dicussion on this part now (rather than whether the decision in it self is funny).
Did you see my comparison about mech vs protoss/warp-tech. While I realize there are differences, if you look at this from an overall perspective, why do you think this approach cannot work? Mech needs Tanks to work, just like protoss needs Robo units to work.
While I agree that heavy Collosus-compositions are boring, I don't think that can be used as an argument against weak WG-units. Rather, it's an argument for:
1) Changing the Immortal in order to make it better late game so T2 units have a bigger influence (especially vs bio-play). 2) Redesigning the Collosus (as I have argued for a couple of times).
Another thing, isn't there some type of incosistency amongst community members?
1) Criticises bio-play/terran for having too good T1 units and not good enough T3 units. 2) Criticises protoss for having too weak T1 units and too good T3 units.
To me there doesn't seem to be any consistency here, rather it makes more sense to me that people are seeing a problem, but are not identifying the true causes of it correctly.
On July 24 2014 20:33 Goofinator wrote: Your example with techlab rax and gateways is terrible. With techlab rax you have to actually be in the base to manage the add-ons (if you are switching them around) whereas if you wanted to switch from gateways to warpgate all you need to do is press two keys, one to select the gateways and second to transform them. It is very simple and would add depth - playing defensive? Use gateways so you have shields. Want to reinforce a timing attack? Use warpgate to try and mass the units to win the game (and micro your units so your low shield units are at the back replenishing their shields).
Have you played with it? Hider and I have in Starbow. They tried for years to get this kind of trade-off system right. It's a nice idea. But it's mechanically boring to press buttons 20seconds in advance, so you can warp-in. Even more it is inefficient, to stop production, and then transform just so that you then realize that you actually don't want to warp in at your warp prism, because there are hydralisks already chasing it. And at the end of the day, unless the production malus is huge, people are just going to build another warpgate for 150/0. At which point, you are often just better off not using warpgate at all, because it makes you soooo weak, to do a warpin and then not being able to produce for like 40-50seconds.
Yeh, so I guess one could argue here that it can be solved by tweaking stats.
For instance, Warp-tech to Gateway transformation (and vice vers) could be faster. That would probably incentivize more usage, but still, I don't think it's ever gonna be something people enjoy doing.
If on the other hand, it already existed inSc2 and it was balanced around this transform-concept, it wouldn't be something I would be heavily against. But now that it isn't, I don't agree with redesigning protoss to make this concept work.
There wouldn't even be gateways in the game if warpgates wouldn't be so OP early on. So just ignore the existence of gateways and end any discussion towards using them. Whatever you try to do after a short while it would either be always gateway or warpgate, so changes would only add choices for people that like the less effective version. So what if we only had gateways that crank out units that are even more powerful. We had Terran production mechanics for the Protoss. Protoss is a mix between Zerg and Terran production and that makes it interesting. Otherwise we would see a constant stream of Robo and Gateway units. The only issue i see with Warpgates is that the Protoss oversupply ability is so easy to use (though its the most expensive) and that there harassment can be non commiting (2 suppy 200 minerals where you need to send enough stuff that can deal with x warpgates of the opponent). Those 2 things would not be changed by making gateways a choice and warpgates weaker, they would only get slightly weakened. Also with Warpgates the Zealot wave would arrive instead of being warped in unless 200 supply are hit. And they would probably bring some Immortals along, which usually doesn't happen since they could easily get sniped all alone.
All the Midgame stuff Protoss can do is because you can't attack them not because they can warp in in your face. It helps them of course doing it but with units having to move over its like a slow instant produced Zerg army.
It adds things by allowing changes in other areas. This is what you're missing, you seem completely focused on the WG mechanic itself. By reducing its impact on the game, it opens up opportunities to change other things, like protoss t1-t2/3 power curve.
How can I be missing this once I in all my other posts argued for the effects that changes to WG would have
I just don't see WG being an inherently good or fun mechanic, it should not be treated as something that is just presumed to be better for the game than gateway production. I
I agree with this. It all depends on how you design the game around it. But point is, how does your suggested tradeoff to WG makes it possible to rebalance the game in a better way that my suggested change doesn't.
I've said it like three times now, it let's us look at protoss t1 vs t2/3, and the ridiculous power curve we find there. It could potentially allow changes that smooth out that curve and make protoss basic units more relevant for longer.
Basic Protoss units are plenty strong. And then some. And they are very relevant all game long. There is no "ridiculous power curve". Please stop repeating this trash.
Where do this idea that gateway units are trash come from?
Zealots are strong. They are more tanky than mauraders, but cheaper, and then they become chargelots, with all the problem for terrans, which is why hellbats and +40 shield splash damage for widow mines exists. And they are still overwhelmingly powerful.
Stalkers are strong. There was a whole season dominated by blink stalkers. They have a role all game long as opposed to other units that just die to collosii, or roaches that just become supply inefficient or just plain useless like corruptors.
Sentries are strong. Forcefields are useful as soon as a sentry pops. Guardian shield and hallucination are useful all game long. That's all the gateway units. And HT/DT/Archon don't need an explanation.
It adds things by allowing changes in other areas. This is what you're missing, you seem completely focused on the WG mechanic itself. By reducing its impact on the game, it opens up opportunities to change other things, like protoss t1-t2/3 power curve.
How can I be missing this once I in all my other posts argued for the effects that changes to WG would have
I just don't see WG being an inherently good or fun mechanic, it should not be treated as something that is just presumed to be better for the game than gateway production. I
I agree with this. It all depends on how you design the game around it. But point is, how does your suggested tradeoff to WG makes it possible to rebalance the game in a better way that my suggested change doesn't.
I've said it like three times now, it let's us look at protoss t1 vs t2/3, and the ridiculous power curve we find there. It could potentially allow changes that smooth out that curve and make protoss basic units more relevant for longer.
Basic Protoss units are plenty strong. And then some. And they are very relevant all game long. There is no "ridiculous power curve". Please stop repeating this trash.
I agree. Zealots with 3 armor and charge are scary.
Yeah, Chargelot with 3 armor is surely BASIC gateway unit. Stalkers without Blink are trash against bio once the grenades kick in. Basic gw units are trash, that's why protoss has so strong splash damage on higher tears and that's why protoss has charge and blink upgrades... and even then healed bio squad is better than gateway T1 units of the same cost, unless there is a higher tier unit present(usually templar). That's why drops without templar tech are so scary you have to have plenty blink stalkers ready... but yeah, they are strong and powerful
I mean, terran with +3/+3 has a pretty scary units as well, because +3 bio is considered unbeatable in TvZ, so where's the problem? The same stupid example as +3 zealot...
It adds things by allowing changes in other areas. This is what you're missing, you seem completely focused on the WG mechanic itself. By reducing its impact on the game, it opens up opportunities to change other things, like protoss t1-t2/3 power curve.
How can I be missing this once I in all my other posts argued for the effects that changes to WG would have
I just don't see WG being an inherently good or fun mechanic, it should not be treated as something that is just presumed to be better for the game than gateway production. I
I agree with this. It all depends on how you design the game around it. But point is, how does your suggested tradeoff to WG makes it possible to rebalance the game in a better way that my suggested change doesn't.
I've said it like three times now, it let's us look at protoss t1 vs t2/3, and the ridiculous power curve we find there. It could potentially allow changes that smooth out that curve and make protoss basic units more relevant for longer.
Basic Protoss units are plenty strong. And then some. And they are very relevant all game long. There is no "ridiculous power curve". Please stop repeating this trash.
They are only "relevant all game long" if they're supported by Colossi and Templar, and the only reason they're "relevant all game long" is by acting as buffers for those two units. Without Colossi and Templar, pure Gateway units get absolutely torn apart by MMM once you go beyond ~120 supply. Even with Charge. Even with Blink. Even with upgrades.
Everything that lacks splash gets shredded by MMM in the mid to high supplies. That argument doesnt indicate that GW units are bad.
On July 24 2014 22:03 Loccstana wrote: Make it so that after every 3 warp ins, the warpgate turns back into a gateway again and the player has to manually turn them back.
That would be great, i suppose we can also make so that Queens have to run in circle arround hatchery 3 times when they inject larvaee and terran has to lift and land structures after 3 units have been made?
On July 24 2014 22:03 Loccstana wrote: Make it so that after every 3 warp ins, the warpgate turns back into a gateway again and the player has to manually turn them back.
That would be great, i suppose we can also make so that Queens have to run in circle arround hatchery 3 times when they inject larvaee and terran has to lift and land structures after 3 units have been made?
On July 24 2014 00:12 MockHamill wrote: I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
Ha, i'm in the same boat. These latest changes make me not watch SC2 any more since bio+WM is boring to see in every game and any mech helping patch seems very unlikely for at least a few months now. Even the hope is gone lol
This is so obviously not a a true statement.
This is definitely either a closet zerg or someone who can't use bio/mine because it requires micro and wants DK to make Terran like Protoss.
Please explain how turtle mech is more entertaining to watch than something that involves multiple armies at different locations on the map / drops / intensive micro / multitask.
Fastest way to kill SC2 in my opinion is to force Terrans to turtle into 1 hour long mech games.. I'm obsessed with starcraft and I don't have the patience to PLAY those games let alone watch them rofl.
On July 24 2014 00:12 MockHamill wrote: I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
Ha, i'm in the same boat. These latest changes make me not watch SC2 any more since bio+WM is boring to see in every game and any mech helping patch seems very unlikely for at least a few months now. Even the hope is gone lol
This is so obviously not a a true statement.
This is definitely either a closet zerg or someone who can't use bio/mine because it requires micro and wants DK to make Terran like Protoss.
Please explain how turtle mech is more entertaining to watch than something that involves multiple armies at different locations on the map / drops / intensive micro / multitask.
Fastest way to kill SC2 in my opinion is to force Terrans to turtle into 1 hour long mech games.. I'm obsessed with starcraft and I don't have the patience to PLAY those games let alone watch them rofl.
It adds things by allowing changes in other areas. This is what you're missing, you seem completely focused on the WG mechanic itself. By reducing its impact on the game, it opens up opportunities to change other things, like protoss t1-t2/3 power curve.
How can I be missing this once I in all my other posts argued for the effects that changes to WG would have
I just don't see WG being an inherently good or fun mechanic, it should not be treated as something that is just presumed to be better for the game than gateway production. I
I agree with this. It all depends on how you design the game around it. But point is, how does your suggested tradeoff to WG makes it possible to rebalance the game in a better way that my suggested change doesn't.
I've said it like three times now, it let's us look at protoss t1 vs t2/3, and the ridiculous power curve we find there. It could potentially allow changes that smooth out that curve and make protoss basic units more relevant for longer.
Basic Protoss units are plenty strong. And then some. And they are very relevant all game long. There is no "ridiculous power curve". Please stop repeating this trash.
They are only "relevant all game long" if they're supported by Colossi and Templar, and the only reason they're "relevant all game long" is by acting as buffers for those two units. Without Colossi and Templar, pure Gateway units get absolutely torn apart by MMM once you go beyond ~120 supply. Even with Charge. Even with Blink. Even with upgrades.
Bio is also only relevant all game long exactly because there are "higher tier" support units. Chargelots are very strong and have a role all game long in both pvt and pvz. Over all i think no other "monocomposition" has won as many games as pure stalkers. They are also relevant in all MU and play a role all game long. Sentries are kind of underused right now, because of the ultrastrong alternatives (PO, TW, storm). On their own they still are very strong. "They are only buffer". They are more then just that. You know that. Stop playing dumb.
On July 24 2014 22:14 deacon.frost wrote: Yeah, Chargelot with 3 armor is surely BASIC gateway unit. Stalkers without Blink are trash against bio once the grenades kick in. Basic gw units are trash, that's why protoss has so strong splash damage on higher tears and that's why protoss has charge and blink upgrades... and even then healed bio squad is better than gateway T1 units of the same cost, unless there is a higher tier unit present(usually templar). That's why drops without templar tech are so scary you have to have plenty blink stalkers ready... but yeah, they are strong and powerful
I mean, terran with +3/+3 has a pretty scary units as well, because +3 bio is considered unbeatable in TvZ, so where's the problem? The same stupid example as +3 zealot...
Toss production is cheap and fast compared to terran while the units are more on the expensive side. Comparing equally expensive armies is very missleading in this case. You always should look what a race can have on the field at certain timings.
And who considers +3 bio to be unbeatable? A few "hype casters" maybe, when there is a downtime in the game and they need something to talk about. I have seen enough +2 LBM armies roll over +3 bio to know this generalization is BS.
On July 24 2014 00:12 MockHamill wrote: I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
Ha, i'm in the same boat. These latest changes make me not watch SC2 any more since bio+WM is boring to see in every game and any mech helping patch seems very unlikely for at least a few months now. Even the hope is gone lol
This is so obviously not a a true statement.
This is definitely either a closet zerg or someone who can't use bio/mine because it requires micro and wants DK to make Terran like Protoss.
Please explain how turtle mech is more entertaining to watch than something that involves multiple armies at different locations on the map / drops / intensive micro / multitask.
Fastest way to kill SC2 in my opinion is to force Terrans to turtle into 1 hour long mech games.. I'm obsessed with starcraft and I don't have the patience to PLAY those games let alone watch them rofl.
Patience is an extremely undervalued skill.
Yes, but when we are talking "game design" I like the fact that all races can be played at a different pace. It is exciting to watch a slower/teching player (as is the case with mech, robo/templar, zerg in general) get absolutely dismantled by an aggressive player (bio, gateway/stargate, usually banes) , just as its fun to watch a slower/teching player hold attack after attack building up to a powerful potentially game ending attack. Both aggressive and defensive styles are necessary to make this game exciting. It gets boring however when both opt to go for the same strategy slower/teching based style, for example mech (and some air toss builds?) vs swarm host based play but this seems to be more of an exception in most games. So yeah, I think the most important issue right now is to change the pace in these match ups. Probably by changing the swarm host, as it was originally meant to be on the offensive/siege up against defensive positions?
I was away from the internet for a month a came back to this. How is it that the thread is not full of outrage? This buffs widow mines to an absurd extend, doesn't it? It doesn't matter that "Terran weak, halp!" when they buff the unit that was already strong before ... Can please someone explain to me in understandable terms how this patch is acceptable to anyone?
On July 24 2014 00:12 MockHamill wrote: I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
Ha, i'm in the same boat. These latest changes make me not watch SC2 any more since bio+WM is boring to see in every game and any mech helping patch seems very unlikely for at least a few months now. Even the hope is gone lol
This is so obviously not a a true statement.
This is definitely either a closet zerg or someone who can't use bio/mine because it requires micro and wants DK to make Terran like Protoss.
Please explain how turtle mech is more entertaining to watch than something that involves multiple armies at different locations on the map / drops / intensive micro / multitask.
Fastest way to kill SC2 in my opinion is to force Terrans to turtle into 1 hour long mech games.. I'm obsessed with starcraft and I don't have the patience to PLAY those games let alone watch them rofl.
Patience is an extremely undervalued skill.
Yes, but when we are talking "game design" I like the fact that all races can be played at a different pace. It is exciting to watch a slower/teching player (as is the case with mech, robo/templar, zerg in general) get absolutely dismantled by an aggressive player (bio, gateway/stargate, usually banes) , just as its fun to watch a slower/teching player hold attack after attack building up to a powerful potentially game ending attack. Both aggressive and defensive styles are necessary to make this game exciting. It gets boring however when both opt to go for the same strategy slower/teching based style, for example mech (and some air toss builds?) vs swarm host based play but this seems to be more of an exception in most games. So yeah, I think the most important issue right now is to change the pace in these match ups. Probably by changing the swarm host, as it was originally meant to be on the offensive/siege up against defensive positions?
It's not really that these defensive styles are boring in itself. It's rather that the units - as you say the SH is the epitome of this - are either just very boring, or kind of in a weird place balancewise - like the Raven or the BC - or plainly unexciting to engage with - Colossus, Tempest, Ultralisk come to mind. I think what you optimally can get out those styles, is a tug-o-war scenario with slow sieges forward and people trying to find weak points and thereby overextending or breaking positions + a lot of harass in the form of units like hellions or zerglings that are a byproduct of the gasintense other units.
But that requires other units than the SH*, who just does not allow the opponent to attack and players need to get punished for not trying to win the tug-o-war, instead of being rewarded with more PDDs, Yamatos and Seekers that give you free value**.
*and also partly the Viper; people often overgo the fact that it is Vipers that are largely responsible for Terrans not being able to move out and just siege when in danger, because "just sieging" is as good as insta-gging against blinding clouds ** that's something they really got right with the Viper. Since it is easy to refill the the energy if you play well, you want to use that energy as often as possible.
On July 25 2014 00:36 opisska wrote: I was away from the internet for a month a came back to this. How is it that the thread is not full of outrage? This buffs widow mines to an absurd extend, doesn't it? It doesn't matter that "Terran weak, halp!" when they buff the unit that was already strong before ... Can please someone explain to me in understandable terms how this patch is acceptable to anyone?
It's not; Blizzard buffed Terran when they are already really strong at the moment. A lot of the T posters on this thread are biased against their race and want the buffs so they claim "it was necessary" One T poster on this thread suggested warp gate reverting back to gateway after 3 uses lol.
Might as well give each Widow Mine the ability to shoot a nuke and make gateway units un-upgradeable. While we're at it, make Protoss and Zerg start with 1 worker in the beginning of the game too. This way, no one can keep denying the problems. Well..actually, even at that point, I wouldn't be surprised if they asked for more T buffs seeing how biased some posters are.
On July 25 2014 00:36 opisska wrote: I was away from the internet for a month a came back to this. How is it that the thread is not full of outrage? This buffs widow mines to an absurd extend, doesn't it? It doesn't matter that "Terran weak, halp!" when they buff the unit that was already strong before ... Can please someone explain to me in understandable terms how this patch is acceptable to anyone?
Because ZvT wasn't even broken when the mine patch occured - even blizzard said so -, and for ZvT the mine just gets restored to its old status. While in TvP the mine wasn't really strong at that time, so it is probably not going to break the game. And even when it does, the solution to nerf the +shield is very simple.
On July 24 2014 22:14 deacon.frost wrote: Yeah, Chargelot with 3 armor is surely BASIC gateway unit. Stalkers without Blink are trash against bio once the grenades kick in. Basic gw units are trash, that's why protoss has so strong splash damage on higher tears and that's why protoss has charge and blink upgrades... and even then healed bio squad is better than gateway T1 units of the same cost, unless there is a higher tier unit present(usually templar). That's why drops without templar tech are so scary you have to have plenty blink stalkers ready... but yeah, they are strong and powerful
I mean, terran with +3/+3 has a pretty scary units as well, because +3 bio is considered unbeatable in TvZ, so where's the problem? The same stupid example as +3 zealot...
Toss production is cheap and fast compared to terran while the units are more on the expensive side. Comparing equally expensive armies is very missleading in this case. You always should look what a race can have on the field at certain timings.
And who considers +3 bio to be unbeatable? A few "hype casters" maybe, when there is a downtime in the game and they need something to talk about. I have seen enough +2 LBM armies roll over +3 bio to know this generalization is BS.
Reactor = zerg-speed production
Terran units are on the expensive side? LOL. Last time I checked, a MMM army with widow mines was WAYYYYYY cheaper than gateway units mixed in with high tech T3 P units like Colossus, HT, Immortals.
Nothing is unbeatable but +3 bio is incredibly cost efficient and strong, seeing how marines deal insane DPS.
On July 25 2014 00:36 opisska wrote: I was away from the internet for a month a came back to this. How is it that the thread is not full of outrage? This buffs widow mines to an absurd extend, doesn't it? It doesn't matter that "Terran weak, halp!" when they buff the unit that was already strong before ... Can please someone explain to me in understandable terms how this patch is acceptable to anyone?
It's not totally outrageous. Mine buff could be a bit big given that tanks and hellbats were buffed in the meantime, but T definitely needed a little boost in TvZ. And Time Warp nerf was long overdue. I'd have preferred a lesser widow mine buff but hey, let's trust DK for once, maybe this time it won't end up with a T domination of post ranged queen or speed oracles proportion...
On July 24 2014 22:14 deacon.frost wrote: Yeah, Chargelot with 3 armor is surely BASIC gateway unit. Stalkers without Blink are trash against bio once the grenades kick in. Basic gw units are trash, that's why protoss has so strong splash damage on higher tears and that's why protoss has charge and blink upgrades... and even then healed bio squad is better than gateway T1 units of the same cost, unless there is a higher tier unit present(usually templar). That's why drops without templar tech are so scary you have to have plenty blink stalkers ready... but yeah, they are strong and powerful
I mean, terran with +3/+3 has a pretty scary units as well, because +3 bio is considered unbeatable in TvZ, so where's the problem? The same stupid example as +3 zealot...
Toss production is cheap and fast compared to terran while the units are more on the expensive side. Comparing equally expensive armies is very missleading in this case. You always should look what a race can have on the field at certain timings.
And who considers +3 bio to be unbeatable? A few "hype casters" maybe, when there is a downtime in the game and they need something to talk about. I have seen enough +2 LBM armies roll over +3 bio to know this generalization is BS.
Reactor = zerg-speed production
Terran units are on the expensive side? LOL. Last time I checked, a MMM army with widow mines was WAYYYYYY cheaper than gateway units mixed in with high tech T3 P units like Colossus, HT, Immortals.
Nothing is unbeatable but +3 bio is incredibly cost efficient and strong, seeing how marines deal insane DPS.
You compare reactors to zerg burst production / larva mechanic??
Then you talk about +3 marines which is completely negated by +3 armor upgrade. People talk about 3/3 in tvz so much because zerg gets to hive and 3/3 later than terran, giving a large window of upgrade advantage, it is not relevant to pvt.
On July 24 2014 00:12 MockHamill wrote: I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
Ha, i'm in the same boat. These latest changes make me not watch SC2 any more since bio+WM is boring to see in every game and any mech helping patch seems very unlikely for at least a few months now. Even the hope is gone lol
This is so obviously not a a true statement.
This is definitely either a closet zerg or someone who can't use bio/mine because it requires micro and wants DK to make Terran like Protoss.
Please explain how turtle mech is more entertaining to watch than something that involves multiple armies at different locations on the map / drops / intensive micro / multitask.
Fastest way to kill SC2 in my opinion is to force Terrans to turtle into 1 hour long mech games.. I'm obsessed with starcraft and I don't have the patience to PLAY those games let alone watch them rofl.
Patience is an extremely undervalued skill.
Yes, but when we are talking "game design" I like the fact that all races can be played at a different pace. It is exciting to watch a slower/teching player (as is the case with mech, robo/templar, zerg in general) get absolutely dismantled by an aggressive player (bio, gateway/stargate, usually banes) , just as its fun to watch a slower/teching player hold attack after attack building up to a powerful potentially game ending attack. Both aggressive and defensive styles are necessary to make this game exciting. It gets boring however when both opt to go for the same strategy slower/teching based style, for example mech (and some air toss builds?) vs swarm host based play but this seems to be more of an exception in most games. So yeah, I think the most important issue right now is to change the pace in these match ups. Probably by changing the swarm host, as it was originally meant to be on the offensive/siege up against defensive positions?
It's not really that these defensive styles are boring in itself. It's rather that the units - as you say the SH is the epitome of this - are either just very boring, or kind of in a weird place balancewise - like the Raven or the BC - or plainly unexciting to engage with - Colossus, Tempest, Ultralisk come to mind. I think what you optimally can get out those styles, is a tug-o-war scenario with slow sieges forward and people trying to find weak points and thereby overextending or breaking positions + a lot of harass in the form of units like hellions or zerglings that are a byproduct of the gasintense other units.
But that requires other units than the SH*, who just does not allow the opponent to attack and players need to get punished for not trying to win the tug-o-war, instead of being rewarded with more PDDs, Yamatos and Seekers that give you free value**.
*and also partly the Viper; people often overgo the fact that it is Vipers that are largely responsible for Terrans not being able to move out and just siege when in danger, because "just sieging" is as good as insta-gging against blinding clouds ** that's something they really got right with the Viper. Since it is easy to refill the the energy if you play well, you want to use that energy as often as possible.
Vipers are great IMO as they force Tank spreading. Vipers + SHs on the other hand is terrible because by spreading Tanks you start trading with free units, and that's bad.
There are some games from early HOTS where MVP goes mech and Zerg, don't know who it was, used Viper roach hidra and we saw those "mile long" siege lines ones more. Slowly pushing towards Zerg with spaced out Tanks and Hellions.
For a few weeks i though Blizz finally did it, but alas the SH was discovered TT
On July 24 2014 00:12 MockHamill wrote: I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
Ha, i'm in the same boat. These latest changes make me not watch SC2 any more since bio+WM is boring to see in every game and any mech helping patch seems very unlikely for at least a few months now. Even the hope is gone lol
This is so obviously not a a true statement.
This is definitely either a closet zerg or someone who can't use bio/mine because it requires micro and wants DK to make Terran like Protoss.
Please explain how turtle mech is more entertaining to watch than something that involves multiple armies at different locations on the map / drops / intensive micro / multitask.
Fastest way to kill SC2 in my opinion is to force Terrans to turtle into 1 hour long mech games.. I'm obsessed with starcraft and I don't have the patience to PLAY those games let alone watch them rofl.
Patience is an extremely undervalued skill.
Yes, but when we are talking "game design" I like the fact that all races can be played at a different pace. It is exciting to watch a slower/teching player (as is the case with mech, robo/templar, zerg in general) get absolutely dismantled by an aggressive player (bio, gateway/stargate, usually banes) , just as its fun to watch a slower/teching player hold attack after attack building up to a powerful potentially game ending attack. Both aggressive and defensive styles are necessary to make this game exciting. It gets boring however when both opt to go for the same strategy slower/teching based style, for example mech (and some air toss builds?) vs swarm host based play but this seems to be more of an exception in most games. So yeah, I think the most important issue right now is to change the pace in these match ups. Probably by changing the swarm host, as it was originally meant to be on the offensive/siege up against defensive positions?
It's not really that these defensive styles are boring in itself. It's rather that the units - as you say the SH is the epitome of this - are either just very boring, or kind of in a weird place balancewise - like the Raven or the BC - or plainly unexciting to engage with - Colossus, Tempest, Ultralisk come to mind. I think what you optimally can get out those styles, is a tug-o-war scenario with slow sieges forward and people trying to find weak points and thereby overextending or breaking positions + a lot of harass in the form of units like hellions or zerglings that are a byproduct of the gasintense other units.
But that requires other units than the SH*, who just does not allow the opponent to attack and players need to get punished for not trying to win the tug-o-war, instead of being rewarded with more PDDs, Yamatos and Seekers that give you free value**.
*and also partly the Viper; people often overgo the fact that it is Vipers that are largely responsible for Terrans not being able to move out and just siege when in danger, because "just sieging" is as good as insta-gging against blinding clouds ** that's something they really got right with the Viper. Since it is easy to refill the the energy if you play well, you want to use that energy as often as possible.
Vipers are great IMO as they force Tank spreading. Vipers + SHs on the other hand is terrible because by spreading Tanks you start trading with free units, and that's bad.
There are some games from early HOTS where MVP goes mech and Zerg, don't know who it was, used Viper roach hidra and we saw those "mile long" siege lines ones more. Slowly pushing towards Zerg with spaced out Tanks and Hellions.
For a few weeks i though Blizz finally did it, but alas the SH was discovered TT
I'm not to sure about this. I think it is cool to see macro game slow pushes. But I think it's very hard to push against anything Viper related even when no SHs are around. Sure you can do the extreme spread/slow pushes - and after 2mins of preemtive spreading and leapfrogging you are half-way through the map and the Zerg is countering and you pack everything and go home again.
I think the game you are talking about was Dimaga vs Mvp on Newkirk. That was quite fun, but not only through the Mech buffs, but in general with the much better understanding of the Mech style and the discovery of Ravens these kinds of attacks from the Zerg just don't work. On the flipside, Mvp also cannot really push given how spread he has to be, which means to me that the Zerg should lose when trying that kind of stuff, but it will take a long time, since he shouldn't engage offensively...
On July 24 2014 00:12 MockHamill wrote: I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
Ha, i'm in the same boat. These latest changes make me not watch SC2 any more since bio+WM is boring to see in every game and any mech helping patch seems very unlikely for at least a few months now. Even the hope is gone lol
This is so obviously not a a true statement.
This is definitely either a closet zerg or someone who can't use bio/mine because it requires micro and wants DK to make Terran like Protoss.
Please explain how turtle mech is more entertaining to watch than something that involves multiple armies at different locations on the map / drops / intensive micro / multitask.
Fastest way to kill SC2 in my opinion is to force Terrans to turtle into 1 hour long mech games.. I'm obsessed with starcraft and I don't have the patience to PLAY those games let alone watch them rofl.
Patience is an extremely undervalued skill.
Yes, but when we are talking "game design" I like the fact that all races can be played at a different pace. It is exciting to watch a slower/teching player (as is the case with mech, robo/templar, zerg in general) get absolutely dismantled by an aggressive player (bio, gateway/stargate, usually banes) , just as its fun to watch a slower/teching player hold attack after attack building up to a powerful potentially game ending attack. Both aggressive and defensive styles are necessary to make this game exciting. It gets boring however when both opt to go for the same strategy slower/teching based style, for example mech (and some air toss builds?) vs swarm host based play but this seems to be more of an exception in most games. So yeah, I think the most important issue right now is to change the pace in these match ups. Probably by changing the swarm host, as it was originally meant to be on the offensive/siege up against defensive positions?
It's not really that these defensive styles are boring in itself. It's rather that the units - as you say the SH is the epitome of this - are either just very boring, or kind of in a weird place balancewise - like the Raven or the BC - or plainly unexciting to engage with - Colossus, Tempest, Ultralisk come to mind. I think what you optimally can get out those styles, is a tug-o-war scenario with slow sieges forward and people trying to find weak points and thereby overextending or breaking positions + a lot of harass in the form of units like hellions or zerglings that are a byproduct of the gasintense other units.
But that requires other units than the SH*, who just does not allow the opponent to attack and players need to get punished for not trying to win the tug-o-war, instead of being rewarded with more PDDs, Yamatos and Seekers that give you free value**.
*and also partly the Viper; people often overgo the fact that it is Vipers that are largely responsible for Terrans not being able to move out and just siege when in danger, because "just sieging" is as good as insta-gging against blinding clouds ** that's something they really got right with the Viper. Since it is easy to refill the the energy if you play well, you want to use that energy as often as possible.
Vipers are great IMO as they force Tank spreading. Vipers + SHs on the other hand is terrible because by spreading Tanks you start trading with free units, and that's bad.
There are some games from early HOTS where MVP goes mech and Zerg, don't know who it was, used Viper roach hidra and we saw those "mile long" siege lines ones more. Slowly pushing towards Zerg with spaced out Tanks and Hellions.
For a few weeks i though Blizz finally did it, but alas the SH was discovered TT
I'm not to sure about this. I think it is cool to see macro game slow pushes. But I think it's very hard to push against anything Viper related even when no SHs are around. Sure you can do the extreme spread/slow pushes - and after 2mins of preemtive spreading and leapfrogging you are half-way through the map and the Zerg is countering and you pack everything and go home again.
I think the game you are talking about was Dimaga vs Mvp on Newkirk. That was quite fun, but not only through the Mech buffs, but in general with the much better understanding of the Mech style and the discovery of Ravens these kinds of attacks from the Zerg just don't work. On the flipside, Mvp also cannot really push given how spread he has to be, which means to me that the Zerg should lose when trying that kind of stuff, but it will take a long time, since he shouldn't engage offensively...
On July 25 2014 00:36 opisska wrote: I was away from the internet for a month a came back to this. How is it that the thread is not full of outrage? This buffs widow mines to an absurd extend, doesn't it? It doesn't matter that "Terran weak, halp!" when they buff the unit that was already strong before ... Can please someone explain to me in understandable terms how this patch is acceptable to anyone?
It's not; Blizzard buffed Terran when they are already really strong at the moment. A lot of the T posters on this thread are biased against their race and want the buffs so they claim "it was necessary" One T poster on this thread suggested warp gate reverting back to gateway after 3 uses lol.
Might as well give each Widow Mine the ability to shoot a nuke and make gateway units un-upgradeable. While we're at it, make Protoss and Zerg start with 1 worker in the beginning of the game too. This way, no one can keep denying the problems. Well..actually, even at that point, I wouldn't be surprised if they asked for more T buffs seeing how biased some posters are.
Just because you struggle doesn't mean that better players do. I think that the smarter Protoss players have come to realize that endless numbers of Protoss winning at tournaments is not good for the game. Unfortunately the buff seems to buff T more against Z than P. It may help against the muta flock though.
So stick your attitude where the sun doesn't shine.
On July 24 2014 22:14 deacon.frost wrote: Yeah, Chargelot with 3 armor is surely BASIC gateway unit. Stalkers without Blink are trash against bio once the grenades kick in. Basic gw units are trash, that's why protoss has so strong splash damage on higher tears and that's why protoss has charge and blink upgrades... and even then healed bio squad is better than gateway T1 units of the same cost, unless there is a higher tier unit present(usually templar). That's why drops without templar tech are so scary you have to have plenty blink stalkers ready... but yeah, they are strong and powerful
I mean, terran with +3/+3 has a pretty scary units as well, because +3 bio is considered unbeatable in TvZ, so where's the problem? The same stupid example as +3 zealot...
Toss production is cheap and fast compared to terran while the units are more on the expensive side. Comparing equally expensive armies is very missleading in this case. You always should look what a race can have on the field at certain timings.
And who considers +3 bio to be unbeatable? A few "hype casters" maybe, when there is a downtime in the game and they need something to talk about. I have seen enough +2 LBM armies roll over +3 bio to know this generalization is BS.
Reactor = zerg-speed production
Terran units are on the expensive side? LOL. Last time I checked, a MMM army with widow mines was WAYYYYYY cheaper than gateway units mixed in with high tech T3 P units like Colossus, HT, Immortals.
Nothing is unbeatable but +3 bio is incredibly cost efficient and strong, seeing how marines deal insane DPS.
Reactor = zerg-speed production
Yeah sure! Are you actually serious?
Toss production is cheap while the units are more on the expensive side. That's how I meant it. Donno how you managed to misunderstand this.
"incredible"; "insane": Stop it. Yeah, there is a window were terran has a upgrade lead in TvZ. That does not really say anything about balance. There are also often "windows" were zerg flies around with a crapton of mutas and kills of so much for free. That is not a balance concern per se. It's just stupid gameplay if you ask me.
And the ultra expensive toss army is also a stupid myth. Once terran adds a decent number of medivas, vikings and ghosts the army values are pretty similar. Good luck fighting a fully developed toss army with MMM+mines.
On July 24 2014 00:12 MockHamill wrote: I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
Ha, i'm in the same boat. These latest changes make me not watch SC2 any more since bio+WM is boring to see in every game and any mech helping patch seems very unlikely for at least a few months now. Even the hope is gone lol
This is so obviously not a a true statement.
This is definitely either a closet zerg or someone who can't use bio/mine because it requires micro and wants DK to make Terran like Protoss.
Please explain how turtle mech is more entertaining to watch than something that involves multiple armies at different locations on the map / drops / intensive micro / multitask.
Fastest way to kill SC2 in my opinion is to force Terrans to turtle into 1 hour long mech games.. I'm obsessed with starcraft and I don't have the patience to PLAY those games let alone watch them rofl.
Patience is an extremely undervalued skill.
Yes, but when we are talking "game design" I like the fact that all races can be played at a different pace. It is exciting to watch a slower/teching player (as is the case with mech, robo/templar, zerg in general) get absolutely dismantled by an aggressive player (bio, gateway/stargate, usually banes) , just as its fun to watch a slower/teching player hold attack after attack building up to a powerful potentially game ending attack. Both aggressive and defensive styles are necessary to make this game exciting. It gets boring however when both opt to go for the same strategy slower/teching based style, for example mech (and some air toss builds?) vs swarm host based play but this seems to be more of an exception in most games. So yeah, I think the most important issue right now is to change the pace in these match ups. Probably by changing the swarm host, as it was originally meant to be on the offensive/siege up against defensive positions?
It's not really that these defensive styles are boring in itself. It's rather that the units - as you say the SH is the epitome of this - are either just very boring, or kind of in a weird place balancewise - like the Raven or the BC - or plainly unexciting to engage with - Colossus, Tempest, Ultralisk come to mind. I think what you optimally can get out those styles, is a tug-o-war scenario with slow sieges forward and people trying to find weak points and thereby overextending or breaking positions + a lot of harass in the form of units like hellions or zerglings that are a byproduct of the gasintense other units.
But that requires other units than the SH*, who just does not allow the opponent to attack and players need to get punished for not trying to win the tug-o-war, instead of being rewarded with more PDDs, Yamatos and Seekers that give you free value**.
*and also partly the Viper; people often overgo the fact that it is Vipers that are largely responsible for Terrans not being able to move out and just siege when in danger, because "just sieging" is as good as insta-gging against blinding clouds ** that's something they really got right with the Viper. Since it is easy to refill the the energy if you play well, you want to use that energy as often as possible.
Vipers are great IMO as they force Tank spreading. Vipers + SHs on the other hand is terrible because by spreading Tanks you start trading with free units, and that's bad.
There are some games from early HOTS where MVP goes mech and Zerg, don't know who it was, used Viper roach hidra and we saw those "mile long" siege lines ones more. Slowly pushing towards Zerg with spaced out Tanks and Hellions.
For a few weeks i though Blizz finally did it, but alas the SH was discovered TT
I'm not to sure about this. I think it is cool to see macro game slow pushes. But I think it's very hard to push against anything Viper related even when no SHs are around. Sure you can do the extreme spread/slow pushes - and after 2mins of preemtive spreading and leapfrogging you are half-way through the map and the Zerg is countering and you pack everything and go home again.
I think the game you are talking about was Dimaga vs Mvp on Newkirk. That was quite fun, but not only through the Mech buffs, but in general with the much better understanding of the Mech style and the discovery of Ravens these kinds of attacks from the Zerg just don't work. On the flipside, Mvp also cannot really push given how spread he has to be, which means to me that the Zerg should lose when trying that kind of stuff, but it will take a long time, since he shouldn't engage offensively...
On July 23 2014 13:23 StaraCroft wrote: Is this really what terrans want? This basically means if you don't pull your probes in time against an early mine drop you will loose to one mine. And you might still loose if they send in a second medivac into the retreat path of your probes (haven't seen anyone do this since the beta). This doesn't seem like it addresses any balance concerns and will just give random wins to terran if they happen to land a lucky widow mine shot.
Yeah, lucky to find a protoss that has huge reaction times and does not move probes.
You obviously haven't played against this in the beta. If you don't pull the probes before the mine gets dropped it is better to not move them at all because you will just guide the widow mine shot into all of your probes loosing you the game instantly. Of course it's possible to play against this, but a fraction of a second can make the difference between no units lost and 16 probes lost. It is extremely coinflippy.
Widow mines take 3 seconds to burrow and another 1.5 seconds to fire. If you cant react to widow mines in 4.5 seconds, then I really dont know what to say. Most widow mines get only 3-4 kills before they die anyways. On the other hand, the oracle...
A widow mine that got 3-4 kills before the patch will end the game after the patch. Just to make sure you realize this: One WM will kill every probe in the entire spash radius of 1.75 instantly, which is half a mineral line. I'm not saying it will be impossible to defend. I've played against this for months. I'm just saying it increases the punishment for making a mistake as protoss. It's making a binary unit even more binary. It will lead to some easy wins if P makes a mistake, and will change almost nothing if they don't.
Stop being foolish. The +shields will not result in any extra kills vs probes compared to the pre-patched mine got. The mine already had enough damage to kill all probes caught in its splash radius, and mine drops were not game ending before that patch, so they will not be now either. The only thing the +shields helps against is gateway units.
Right now the WM kills probes in a 1.5 radius. After the patch it will kill in a 1.75 radius. Sure it's a buff. But it'S not as big as some here think.
Protoss complaining about WMs drops in their mineral line is so hilarious and ironic when you know that they have oracles and DTs that are way more efficient then a WM in this situation. You didn't scout a WM drop but you have an eyes on the minimap ? Maximum probe lost : 1 You didn't scout an oracle but you have an eyes on the minimap ? You lost the game, gg. You didn't scout a DT drop but you have an eyes on the minimap ? You lost the game, gg.
I was talking about the original widow mine, when it already killed all probes within a 1.75 radius. It was not broken then, and it will not be broken now.
Double the warp in duration from 5 to 10 seconds and also double the damage that a warping in unit takes. This should discourage the in your face warpins.
On July 25 2014 02:54 Faust852 wrote: Protoss complaining about WMs drops in their mineral line is so hilarious and ironic when you know that they have oracles and DTs that are way more efficient then a WM in this situation. You didn't scout a WM drop but you have an eyes on the minimap ? Maximum probe lost : 1 You didn't scout an oracle but you have an eyes on the minimap ? You lost the game, gg. You didn't scout a DT drop but you have an eyes on the minimap ? You lost the game, gg.
To be fair, you lose around 3-4 probes per mine. I saw Supernova drop 3 mines and get 10 kills with it this morning against a Protoss who didn't react whatsoever until AFTER the probes were dead. I think post-patch it will be closer to 4-5 probes per mine on average.
But yeah, it mostly requires 3 - 4 mines with a medivac to deal the same amount of damage to a Protoss mineral line as is done by a single oracle, which is a much bigger commitment, comes later, and can be defended much more easily (unless you allow the mines to burrow right away, and then lack of detection can be annoying).
Not looking forward to dealing with strong mines again in ZvT but such is life lol. Just have to work and splitting and ways to use the mines against the Terran scum
On July 25 2014 00:36 opisska wrote: I was away from the internet for a month a came back to this. How is it that the thread is not full of outrage? This buffs widow mines to an absurd extend, doesn't it? It doesn't matter that "Terran weak, halp!" when they buff the unit that was already strong before ... Can please someone explain to me in understandable terms how this patch is acceptable to anyone?
It's not; Blizzard buffed Terran when they are already really strong at the moment. A lot of the T posters on this thread are biased against their race[...]
The pot calling the kettle black. Statistically Terran isn't strong at all -- to the point where even TL green-lighted a balance-related publication demonstrating the woeful state of Terran.
Widow mines were in a good place pre-nerf; the balance team over at Blizzard justified the nerf by saying they wanted more tanks in the TvZ match-up, so it was effectively a way to force Terrans into different compositions. Sadly, nerfing widow mines doesn't magically make the tank more viable against the buffed mutalisks, so Terran's been sitting in a period of underwhelming performance. Blizzard is now reverting that nerf, realizing it broke balance and the lack of tanks wasn't just due to widow mines being a better option (although they always will be so long as the mutalisk retains its current stats).
On July 25 2014 04:24 Ayaz2810 wrote: Would be nice if someone listed what the changes are. I don't see them in the op or in the battle.net thread. I dont even know what's changing
We’ve just published a new version of the Balance Test Map to the StarCraft II Custom Games list titled "(2)OvergrowthLE (2.1.3 Balance v1.1)". In this new version, we’ll be testing further changes to the Widow Mine’s splash damage and the Mothership Core’s Time Warp ability. During this testing phase, please keep in mind that none of the changes listed below are final. Our plan is to first explore how each change impacts the game and potentially test additional changes after reviewing your feedback. Let's have a look at the full list of changes you'll be testing in this version:
Terran
Widow Mine Splash radius is now 1.75. There are no longer 50% or 25% damage zones. Splash damage is now 40 (+40 Shields) for the full 1.75 splash radius. Thor Changed to prioritize their AA weapon over the AG weapon Protoss
Mothership Core Time Warp duration decreased from 30 to 10 seconds
Here is an interesting change to the mine. As we all know, widow mines do not benefit from attack upgrades due to the fact that it inflicts spell damage. What if the widow mine gains an additional range for every attack upgrade? Widow mines have 6 range with +1, 7 range with +2, etc. I think this would widow mines much more viable lategame in TvP.
On July 25 2014 06:30 Loccstana wrote: Here is an interesting change to the mine. As we all know, widow mines do not benefit from attack upgrades due to the fact that it inflicts spell damage. What if the widow mine gains an additional range for every attack upgrade? Widow mines have 6 range with +1, 7 range with +2, etc. I think this would widow mines much more viable lategame in TvP.
That would affect TvZ, and it goes against the norm.. (that is, weapon upgrades always only increase damage, not range).
Likely they will just try to balance around 50% winrate, any real changes will be in next expansion, if there are any.
Why can't they buff the viking or something? Either a buff to the air damage or even ground damage so they are more useful for a counterattack if the Terran wins a fight in late game TvP.
On July 25 2014 06:30 Loccstana wrote: Here is an interesting change to the mine. As we all know, widow mines do not benefit from attack upgrades due to the fact that it inflicts spell damage. What if the widow mine gains an additional range for every attack upgrade? Widow mines have 6 range with +1, 7 range with +2, etc. I think this would widow mines much more viable lategame in TvP.
Could do the +1 range at the ebay to include WM, that already increases auto turrets, turrets, pfort, etc.
On July 25 2014 12:27 Livelovedie wrote: Why can't they buff the viking or something? Either a buff to the air damage or even ground damage so they are more useful for a counterattack if the Terran wins a fight in late game TvP.
I'd like them reverting the ground damage to 14, in addition to adding one armor for the ground form to help emphasize its concept as an assault walker.
On July 25 2014 06:30 Loccstana wrote: Here is an interesting change to the mine. As we all know, widow mines do not benefit from attack upgrades due to the fact that it inflicts spell damage. What if the widow mine gains an additional range for every attack upgrade? Widow mines have 6 range with +1, 7 range with +2, etc. I think this would widow mines much more viable lategame in TvP.
That would affect TvZ, and it goes against the norm.. (that is, weapon upgrades always only increase damage, not range).
Likely they will just try to balance around 50% winrate, any real changes will be in next expansion, if there are any.
ur right with the 50% thing... u could also see this coz of the ladder map choices since start of hots... they try just to get their stats around 50% so when people ask they can smash their stats right into our faces, and say see its balanced... but well win or loss isnt the only aspect in balance imo. balance is also how much work u need to put into something. i mean im terran and terrans feels a bit harsch in tvz and tvp right now, BUT i dont minded it for a very long time against zerg because they have similar effort they need to put into a game. against protoss in tvp it feels like the terran has to put 100 times more effort in it to win a gam e then the protoss player needs to... just my personal oppinion
"hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
On July 25 2014 12:27 Livelovedie wrote: Why can't they buff the viking or something? Either a buff to the air damage or even ground damage so they are more useful for a counterattack if the Terran wins a fight in late game TvP.
Yeah, what I'd really like to see are some changes with T anti-air options, as that Thor change feels rather ridiculous, it's just a bulky, expensive must-have, but no-good unit to me. I've proposed a Valkyrie-upgrade for Vikings made available when fusion core tech hits long time ago and somehow I still like it.
Can cost a bit money so it won't be as easy to rush this out (200/200 maybe?), but it'll give your Vikings a new ability to permanently transform into Valkyries (name it whatever you like), reducing their range to 5-6 or so, but enabling good splash damage (maybe adding rather slow movement speed or making them rather squishy to compensate for their strength).
Another idea to boost Thors in the defending department I had was returning the 250mm Strike Cannon as some sort of AoE spell against flying units, creating a sort-of flak barriage to prevent air from passing through a certain air sector for a limited amount of time (imagine a larger AA-only Storm with 2-3 secs of channeling time, so opponent can react and micro against it).
Thors in their current state aren't microable, they only excel against Mutalisks if the opposing player fucks up with the magic box big time, at least now with the imminent WM revert you can be glad you don't have to build 5-6 of those mofos anymore and can substitute again.
On July 25 2014 12:27 Livelovedie wrote: Why can't they buff the viking or something? Either a buff to the air damage or even ground damage so they are more useful for a counterattack if the Terran wins a fight in late game TvP.
Yeah, what I'd really like to see are some changes with T anti-air options, as that Thor change feels rather ridiculous, it's just a bulky, expensive must-have, but no-good unit to me. I've proposed a Valkyrie-upgrade for Vikings made available when fusion core tech hits long time ago and somehow I still like it.
Can cost a bit money so it won't be as easy to rush this out (200/200 maybe?), but it'll give your Vikings a new ability to permanently transform into Valkyries (name it whatever you like), reducing their range to 5-6 or so, but enabling good splash damage (maybe adding rather slow movement speed or making them rather squishy to compensate for their strength).
Another idea to boost Thors in the defending department I had was returning the 250mm Strike Cannon as some sort of AoE spell against flying units, creating a sort-of flak barriage to prevent air from passing through a certain air sector for a limited amount of time (imagine a larger AA-only Storm with 2-3 secs of channeling time, so opponent can react and micro against it).
Thors in their current state aren't microable, they only excel against Mutalisks if the opposing player fucks up with the magic box big time, at least now with the imminent WM revert you can be glad you don't have to build 5-6 of those mofos anymore and can substitute again.
Just yesterday I was thinking about a fusion core upgrade to vikings as well actually. I was thinking a +damage to massive though, instead of an entirely new unit.
On July 25 2014 12:27 Livelovedie wrote: Why can't they buff the viking or something? Either a buff to the air damage or even ground damage so they are more useful for a counterattack if the Terran wins a fight in late game TvP.
Yeah, what I'd really like to see are some changes with T anti-air options, as that Thor change feels rather ridiculous, it's just a bulky, expensive must-have, but no-good unit to me. I've proposed a Valkyrie-upgrade for Vikings made available when fusion core tech hits long time ago and somehow I still like it.
Can cost a bit money so it won't be as easy to rush this out (200/200 maybe?), but it'll give your Vikings a new ability to permanently transform into Valkyries (name it whatever you like), reducing their range to 5-6 or so, but enabling good splash damage (maybe adding rather slow movement speed or making them rather squishy to compensate for their strength).
Another idea to boost Thors in the defending department I had was returning the 250mm Strike Cannon as some sort of AoE spell against flying units, creating a sort-of flak barriage to prevent air from passing through a certain air sector for a limited amount of time (imagine a larger AA-only Storm with 2-3 secs of channeling time, so opponent can react and micro against it).
Thors in their current state aren't microable, they only excel against Mutalisks if the opposing player fucks up with the magic box big time, at least now with the imminent WM revert you can be glad you don't have to build 5-6 of those mofos anymore and can substitute again.
Just yesterday I was thinking about a fusion core upgrade to vikings as well actually. I was thinking a +damage to massive though, instead of an entirely new unit.
I would imagine this just as an upgraded, visually enhanced Viking, similar to the Hellbat (personal preference on my side, I guess ^^)
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
Sounds a lot like the old fungal buffs vs everything in WoL. Don't ever change Blizzard... (shhhh, reasoned arguments don't work, I'm giving sarcasm and reverse psychology a try)
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
The "bio isnt versatile enough" hits the nail. Improvements to SC2 could be implemented with giving terran transitions in and out of mech/air instead of focusing both tvz/p even more on bio mine than it already is.
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
I guess you have reading comprehension problem since the patch was targeted for TvZ and not TvP.
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
I guess you have reading comprehension problem since the patch was targeted for TvZ and not TvP.
This patch is for both TvZ and TvP.
"[...] returns the Widow Mine to how it used to be against Zerg, and provides big improvements against Protoss armies in the mid and late game."
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
The "bio isnt versatile enough" hits the nail. Improvements to SC2 could be implemented with giving terran transitions in and out of mech/air instead of focusing both tvz/p even more on bio mine than it already is.
You do realize that he was being sarcastic right? Bio is THE definition of versatile. You have the most cost efficient army & units & production path & upgrade (air and vehicle upgrade), and now you want to be able to tech switch flawlessly too?
I think a good start would be increasing the gas cost on medicvacs, and separating air & vehicle upgrades again. Make Stim last a shorter amount of time or reduce the overall DPS of the bio army. T is way less gas-constrained than the other 2 races, so they need fewer bases, but at the same time, their bases are easier to defend & harder to destroy.
I would be supportive of tanks getting a 10 damage buff if Bio is nerfed heavily. Medivacs now cost 150 gas, marines now do 1 damage less, stim lasts 75% of current duration, marauder loses 20 health
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
The "bio isnt versatile enough" hits the nail. Improvements to SC2 could be implemented with giving terran transitions in and out of mech/air instead of focusing both tvz/p even more on bio mine than it already is.
You do realize that he was being sarcastic right? Bio is THE definition of versatile. You have the most cost efficient army & units & production path & upgrade (air and vehicle upgrade), and now you want to be able to tech switch flawlessly too?
I think a good start would be increasing the gas cost on medicvacs, and separating air & vehicle upgrades again. Make Stim last a shorter amount of time or reduce the overall DPS of the bio army. T is way less gas-constrained than the other 2 races, so they need fewer bases, but at the same time, their bases are easier to defend & harder to destroy.
I would be supportive of tanks getting a 10 damage buff if Bio is nerfed heavily. Medivacs now cost 150 gas, marines now do 1 damage less, stim lasts 75% of current duration, marauder loses 20 health
What in the fuck?
I can't tell if this a total troll post or someone who is just that delusional..
Do you not realize that the patch is to buff T bc it is proven UP?
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
This is an absolutely hilarious statement coming from a Protoss player - who's most intensive APM unit requires spam left clicking instant storm on packs of units. And yeah - the fact that widow mines are low apm definitely make them good late game against colossus..bc they will DEFINITELY fire off vs units that have triple the range.. sick argument.
On July 24 2014 00:12 MockHamill wrote: I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
Ha, i'm in the same boat. These latest changes make me not watch SC2 any more since bio+WM is boring to see in every game and any mech helping patch seems very unlikely for at least a few months now. Even the hope is gone lol
This is so obviously not a a true statement.
This is definitely either a closet zerg or someone who can't use bio/mine because it requires micro and wants DK to make Terran like Protoss.
Please explain how turtle mech is more entertaining to watch than something that involves multiple armies at different locations on the map / drops / intensive micro / multitask.
Fastest way to kill SC2 in my opinion is to force Terrans to turtle into 1 hour long mech games.. I'm obsessed with starcraft and I don't have the patience to PLAY those games let alone watch them rofl.
Patience is an extremely undervalued skill.
Not from a viewer's perspective who wants to watch more than 1 game of a series of a tournament in an evening ;p
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
The "bio isnt versatile enough" hits the nail. Improvements to SC2 could be implemented with giving terran transitions in and out of mech/air instead of focusing both tvz/p even more on bio mine than it already is.
You do realize that he was being sarcastic right? Bio is THE definition of versatile. You have the most cost efficient army & units & production path & upgrade (air and vehicle upgrade), and now you want to be able to tech switch flawlessly too?
I think a good start would be increasing the gas cost on medicvacs, and separating air & vehicle upgrades again. Make Stim last a shorter amount of time or reduce the overall DPS of the bio army. T is way less gas-constrained than the other 2 races, so they need fewer bases, but at the same time, their bases are easier to defend & harder to destroy.
I would be supportive of tanks getting a 10 damage buff if Bio is nerfed heavily. Medivacs now cost 150 gas, marines now do 1 damage less, stim lasts 75% of current duration, marauder loses 20 health
What in the fuck?
I can't tell if this a total troll post or someone who is just that delusional..
Do you not realize that the patch is to buff T bc it is proven UP?
T is UP in TvP. in TvZ there where much bigger differences in the past (2010 and early 2011 heavily T favored, during BL infestor times heavily Z favored, pre-overseer speedbuff HOTS pretty T favored (not as much as the other 2 times)). right now we see approximately as many T as Z players in GSL Code S next season while there are much more P players.
so this patch doesnt do much to help TvP but probably gonna mess up TvZ. we will see about that but i guess especially WMs will be too strong after this patch in TvZ.
I think the influence of the patch will be only minimal. Its just that the new mine (just like the old) will punish mistakes by zerg more, just like movement mistakes by terran vs banelings get punished. Versus a good zerg this won't happen much, unless you are TaeJa and can force mistakes. But maybe I (with my terran bias ) should reserve my words for later, when we have a better vision on the effects of this patch .
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
The "bio isnt versatile enough" hits the nail. Improvements to SC2 could be implemented with giving terran transitions in and out of mech/air instead of focusing both tvz/p even more on bio mine than it already is.
You do realize that he was being sarcastic right? Bio is THE definition of versatile. You have the most cost efficient army & units & production path & upgrade (air and vehicle upgrade), and now you want to be able to tech switch flawlessly too?
I think a good start would be increasing the gas cost on medicvacs, and separating air & vehicle upgrades again. Make Stim last a shorter amount of time or reduce the overall DPS of the bio army. T is way less gas-constrained than the other 2 races, so they need fewer bases, but at the same time, their bases are easier to defend & harder to destroy.
I would be supportive of tanks getting a 10 damage buff if Bio is nerfed heavily. Medivacs now cost 150 gas, marines now do 1 damage less, stim lasts 75% of current duration, marauder loses 20 health
What in the fuck?
I can't tell if this a total troll post or someone who is just that delusional..
Do you not realize that the patch is to buff T bc it is proven UP?
T is UP in TvP. in TvZ there where much bigger differences in the past (2010 and early 2011 heavily T favored, during BL infestor times heavily Z favored, pre-overseer speedbuff HOTS pretty T favored (not as much as the other 2 times)). right now we see approximately as many T as Z players in GSL Code S next season while there are much more P players.
so this patch doesnt do much to help TvP but probably gonna mess up TvZ. we will see about that but i guess especially WMs will be too strong after this patch in TvZ.
I disagree in terms of the simplicity of the assumptions - The # of code S players is relevant but a very small indicator in my opinion in terms of overall balance. You have to factor in the total picture, not isolate Tvp and Tvz - if P is OP vs T and Z, and Z is OP vs T - you might still have substantially less Z players than P players independent of TvZ due to Protoss eliminating zergs.. and vice versa for # of T players... the individual matchups themselves even have to be considered - for instance Flash beating Symbol and Hush - based on proleague results Flash is a top 5 Terran in the world.. Symbol and Hush are not in the conversation of their race. Innovation same deal - Ruin and Hurricane would not be considered top 5 Protoss players.
Having said that - really in my opinion the ro16 even ro8 results are a better overall indicator.. at this point you typically have the best players of each race squaring off. If a patch doesn't go through before then I would bet my savings you won't see a Terran..maybe Maru will some how get in lol - but we all saw how he did it this past season.
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
The "bio isnt versatile enough" hits the nail. Improvements to SC2 could be implemented with giving terran transitions in and out of mech/air instead of focusing both tvz/p even more on bio mine than it already is.
You do realize that he was being sarcastic right? Bio is THE definition of versatile. You have the most cost efficient army & units & production path & upgrade (air and vehicle upgrade), and now you want to be able to tech switch flawlessly too?
I think a good start would be increasing the gas cost on medicvacs, and separating air & vehicle upgrades again. Make Stim last a shorter amount of time or reduce the overall DPS of the bio army. T is way less gas-constrained than the other 2 races, so they need fewer bases, but at the same time, their bases are easier to defend & harder to destroy.
I would be supportive of tanks getting a 10 damage buff if Bio is nerfed heavily. Medivacs now cost 150 gas, marines now do 1 damage less, stim lasts 75% of current duration, marauder loses 20 health
What in the fuck?
I can't tell if this a total troll post or someone who is just that delusional..
Do you not realize that the patch is to buff T bc it is proven UP?
T is UP in TvP. in TvZ there where much bigger differences in the past (2010 and early 2011 heavily T favored, during BL infestor times heavily Z favored, pre-overseer speedbuff HOTS pretty T favored (not as much as the other 2 times)). right now we see approximately as many T as Z players in GSL Code S next season while there are much more P players.
so this patch doesnt do much to help TvP but probably gonna mess up TvZ. we will see about that but i guess especially WMs will be too strong after this patch in TvZ.
I disagree in terms of the simplicity of the assumptions - The # of code S players is relevant but a very small indicator in my opinion in terms of overall balance. You have to factor in the total picture, not isolate Tvp and Tvz - if P is OP vs T and Z, and Z is OP vs T - you might still have substantially less Z players than P players independent of TvZ due to Protoss eliminating zergs.. and vice versa for # of T players... the individual matchups themselves even have to be considered - for instance Flash beating Symbol and Hush - based on proleague results Flash is a top 5 Terran in the world.. Symbol and Hush are not in the conversation of their race. Innovation same deal - Ruin and Hurricane would not be considered top 5 Protoss players.
Having said that - really in my opinion the ro16 even ro8 results are a better overall indicator.. at this point you typically have the best players of each race squaring off. If a patch doesn't go through before then I would bet my savings you won't see a Terran..maybe Maru will some how get in lol - but we all saw how he did it this past season.
if P is OP vs T and Z and Z OP vs T....why would you get about the same amount of T and Z Code S players next season then? also there are other T players than flash and innovation advancing + you forget to mention P and Z players that advance not because of their race but because of skill like sos, rain, drg etc.
TvZ definetly wasnt broken and i havent heard pros say so. all there was, was a slight Z favor which might turn into a big T favor after thor and especially mine buff which was over the top imo. and most of all buffing T midgame even more just makes it so that Z has to defensive turtle once again and try to somehow get out mass muta or ultras. blizz shouldve buffed lategame T and help T especially in PvT.
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
The "bio isnt versatile enough" hits the nail. Improvements to SC2 could be implemented with giving terran transitions in and out of mech/air instead of focusing both tvz/p even more on bio mine than it already is.
You do realize that he was being sarcastic right? Bio is THE definition of versatile. You have the most cost efficient army & units & production path & upgrade (air and vehicle upgrade), and now you want to be able to tech switch flawlessly too?
I think a good start would be increasing the gas cost on medicvacs, and separating air & vehicle upgrades again. Make Stim last a shorter amount of time or reduce the overall DPS of the bio army. T is way less gas-constrained than the other 2 races, so they need fewer bases, but at the same time, their bases are easier to defend & harder to destroy.
I would be supportive of tanks getting a 10 damage buff if Bio is nerfed heavily. Medivacs now cost 150 gas, marines now do 1 damage less, stim lasts 75% of current duration, marauder loses 20 health
What in the fuck?
I can't tell if this a total troll post or someone who is just that delusional..
Do you not realize that the patch is to buff T bc it is proven UP?
That guy must be trolling, or demonstrates complete lack of understanding of the game. Usually what you'd see on Bnet forums, and in all cases you just need a click to see their league which explains everything.
Just read his posts on page 23 and then palm your face...
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
The "bio isnt versatile enough" hits the nail. Improvements to SC2 could be implemented with giving terran transitions in and out of mech/air instead of focusing both tvz/p even more on bio mine than it already is.
You do realize that he was being sarcastic right? Bio is THE definition of versatile. You have the most cost efficient army & units & production path & upgrade (air and vehicle upgrade), and now you want to be able to tech switch flawlessly too?
I think a good start would be increasing the gas cost on medicvacs, and separating air & vehicle upgrades again. Make Stim last a shorter amount of time or reduce the overall DPS of the bio army. T is way less gas-constrained than the other 2 races, so they need fewer bases, but at the same time, their bases are easier to defend & harder to destroy.
I would be supportive of tanks getting a 10 damage buff if Bio is nerfed heavily. Medivacs now cost 150 gas, marines now do 1 damage less, stim lasts 75% of current duration, marauder loses 20 health
What in the fuck?
I can't tell if this a total troll post or someone who is just that delusional..
Do you not realize that the patch is to buff T bc it is proven UP?
T is UP in TvP. in TvZ there where much bigger differences in the past (2010 and early 2011 heavily T favored, during BL infestor times heavily Z favored, pre-overseer speedbuff HOTS pretty T favored (not as much as the other 2 times)). right now we see approximately as many T as Z players in GSL Code S next season while there are much more P players.
so this patch doesnt do much to help TvP but probably gonna mess up TvZ. we will see about that but i guess especially WMs will be too strong after this patch in TvZ.
I disagree in terms of the simplicity of the assumptions - The # of code S players is relevant but a very small indicator in my opinion in terms of overall balance. You have to factor in the total picture, not isolate Tvp and Tvz - if P is OP vs T and Z, and Z is OP vs T - you might still have substantially less Z players than P players independent of TvZ due to Protoss eliminating zergs.. and vice versa for # of T players... the individual matchups themselves even have to be considered - for instance Flash beating Symbol and Hush - based on proleague results Flash is a top 5 Terran in the world.. Symbol and Hush are not in the conversation of their race. Innovation same deal - Ruin and Hurricane would not be considered top 5 Protoss players.
Having said that - really in my opinion the ro16 even ro8 results are a better overall indicator.. at this point you typically have the best players of each race squaring off. If a patch doesn't go through before then I would bet my savings you won't see a Terran..maybe Maru will some how get in lol - but we all saw how he did it this past season.
You are right that the reason why we see that "few" Zergs in Code S this season is due to Protoss beating the shit out of them (79%winrate P>Z) in Code A. However, since the TvZ winrate is at a perfect 50% this season and by simply looking at how the matches played out, it is pretty clear that it wasn't Terran profiting from Zergs weakness, but Protoss (who by the way had 59% winrate against Terran).
While your example with Flash is true, it's an isolated example. On the same page we also had DRG beating the shit out of Turn while top-Zergs like Roro, Life, Hydra and ByuL all ended up with negative results against (stronger and not so strong) Terrans. At the end of the day, we should treat it as mostly the top-quantile of Ts, Ps and Zs who played in Code A and that this is the toplevel of Starcraft. It's not like we had a bunch of nonames for Zerg, while players like Turn, Cure or skyhigh are not (Korean) championship quality.
TvZ is surely not massively imbalanced. We have been in a periode pretty comparable to how it was in early HotS in terms of winrates, with an average of 50-55% for Zerg. On the flipside however, I also have to say, just like how the mine nerf didn't break the game. Just like we see these near balanced winrates with the nerfed mine, exactly like that we shouldn't expect the mine rebuff to break the game. It's not such a massive deal as people make it out to be and has never been. The height of Terran winrates mid-2013 was like 55% and the height of Zerg winrates in the last months was 55%. In between we had phases of 50%, with stronger and with weaker mines.
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
The "bio isnt versatile enough" hits the nail. Improvements to SC2 could be implemented with giving terran transitions in and out of mech/air instead of focusing both tvz/p even more on bio mine than it already is.
You do realize that he was being sarcastic right? Bio is THE definition of versatile. You have the most cost efficient army & units & production path & upgrade (air and vehicle upgrade), and now you want to be able to tech switch flawlessly too?
I think a good start would be increasing the gas cost on medicvacs, and separating air & vehicle upgrades again. Make Stim last a shorter amount of time or reduce the overall DPS of the bio army. T is way less gas-constrained than the other 2 races, so they need fewer bases, but at the same time, their bases are easier to defend & harder to destroy.
I would be supportive of tanks getting a 10 damage buff if Bio is nerfed heavily. Medivacs now cost 150 gas, marines now do 1 damage less, stim lasts 75% of current duration, marauder loses 20 health
What in the fuck?
I can't tell if this a total troll post or someone who is just that delusional..
Do you not realize that the patch is to buff T bc it is proven UP?
T is UP in TvP. in TvZ there where much bigger differences in the past (2010 and early 2011 heavily T favored, during BL infestor times heavily Z favored, pre-overseer speedbuff HOTS pretty T favored (not as much as the other 2 times)). right now we see approximately as many T as Z players in GSL Code S next season while there are much more P players.
so this patch doesnt do much to help TvP but probably gonna mess up TvZ. we will see about that but i guess especially WMs will be too strong after this patch in TvZ.
I disagree in terms of the simplicity of the assumptions - The # of code S players is relevant but a very small indicator in my opinion in terms of overall balance. You have to factor in the total picture, not isolate Tvp and Tvz - if P is OP vs T and Z, and Z is OP vs T - you might still have substantially less Z players than P players independent of TvZ due to Protoss eliminating zergs.. and vice versa for # of T players... the individual matchups themselves even have to be considered - for instance Flash beating Symbol and Hush - based on proleague results Flash is a top 5 Terran in the world.. Symbol and Hush are not in the conversation of their race. Innovation same deal - Ruin and Hurricane would not be considered top 5 Protoss players.
Having said that - really in my opinion the ro16 even ro8 results are a better overall indicator.. at this point you typically have the best players of each race squaring off. If a patch doesn't go through before then I would bet my savings you won't see a Terran..maybe Maru will some how get in lol - but we all saw how he did it this past season.
if P is OP vs T and Z and Z OP vs T....why would you get about the same amount of T and Z Code S players next season then?
When you're talking about 32 people, it could be for a million reasons, and you should know that too...
Then again I agree with you that I haven't seen zerg overperform vs terran in the very recent past, so the concern may be legitimate. We'll see.
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
The "bio isnt versatile enough" hits the nail. Improvements to SC2 could be implemented with giving terran transitions in and out of mech/air instead of focusing both tvz/p even more on bio mine than it already is.
You do realize that he was being sarcastic right? Bio is THE definition of versatile. You have the most cost efficient army & units & production path & upgrade (air and vehicle upgrade), and now you want to be able to tech switch flawlessly too?
I think a good start would be increasing the gas cost on medicvacs, and separating air & vehicle upgrades again. Make Stim last a shorter amount of time or reduce the overall DPS of the bio army. T is way less gas-constrained than the other 2 races, so they need fewer bases, but at the same time, their bases are easier to defend & harder to destroy.
I would be supportive of tanks getting a 10 damage buff if Bio is nerfed heavily. Medivacs now cost 150 gas, marines now do 1 damage less, stim lasts 75% of current duration, marauder loses 20 health
What in the fuck?
I can't tell if this a total troll post or someone who is just that delusional..
Do you not realize that the patch is to buff T bc it is proven UP?
T is UP in TvP. in TvZ there where much bigger differences in the past (2010 and early 2011 heavily T favored, during BL infestor times heavily Z favored, pre-overseer speedbuff HOTS pretty T favored (not as much as the other 2 times)). right now we see approximately as many T as Z players in GSL Code S next season while there are much more P players.
so this patch doesnt do much to help TvP but probably gonna mess up TvZ. we will see about that but i guess especially WMs will be too strong after this patch in TvZ.
I disagree in terms of the simplicity of the assumptions - The # of code S players is relevant but a very small indicator in my opinion in terms of overall balance. You have to factor in the total picture, not isolate Tvp and Tvz - if P is OP vs T and Z, and Z is OP vs T - you might still have substantially less Z players than P players independent of TvZ due to Protoss eliminating zergs.. and vice versa for # of T players... the individual matchups themselves even have to be considered - for instance Flash beating Symbol and Hush - based on proleague results Flash is a top 5 Terran in the world.. Symbol and Hush are not in the conversation of their race. Innovation same deal - Ruin and Hurricane would not be considered top 5 Protoss players.
Having said that - really in my opinion the ro16 even ro8 results are a better overall indicator.. at this point you typically have the best players of each race squaring off. If a patch doesn't go through before then I would bet my savings you won't see a Terran..maybe Maru will some how get in lol - but we all saw how he did it this past season.
if P is OP vs T and Z and Z OP vs T....why would you get about the same amount of T and Z Code S players next season then? also there are other T players than flash and innovation advancing + you forget to mention P and Z players that advance not because of their race but because of skill like sos, rain, drg etc.
TvZ definetly wasnt broken and i havent heard pros say so. all there was, was a slight Z favor which might turn into a big T favor after thor and especially mine buff which was over the top imo. and most of all buffing T midgame even more just makes it so that Z has to defensive turtle once again and try to somehow get out mass muta or ultras. blizz shouldve buffed lategame T and help T especially in PvT.
Did you read my post? I basically explained exactly how you could get a close to even (though not even) amount of players in code S without the game being balanced. It's hard to answer your question about Tvz being "broken" because that's a pretty vague description - but in terms of it being heavily favored for Z there are plenty of pro players who have said it - not that that makes it relevant whatsoever as pros get paid to WIN the game so I'm not sure why any would honestly say that their race was OP. It's pretty unanimously understood that once Z gets to a critical mass of banelings / mutas there is no real way for the Terran to trade cost effectively and keep up with economy at the same time.. it's very difficult to argue this point. Before the widow-mine nerf this was not the case, there was enough splash to zone out ling/bling/muta a moves so that in the event the game did get to the post -20 min mark the Terran still had a chance to win.. Ultra/Infestor and creep spread mitigate the effect of mines super-late game - not to mention that there is plenty of data that has been analyzed (Post overseer BUFF and Pre Mine NERF) that show a balanced professional metagame in Tvz. It's not difficult to understand why they would test going back to it.. if it does shift to Terran imbalance (which would surprise me) they can always ratchet it back but I really don't see it happening - but only time will tell.
Having said all this - it might be interesting to see the Ro32 code S go down without a patch..I'd throw a hefty wager that Cure, TY and Reality would all be eliminated.. even perhaps Innovation - Bbyong might get out w some Gangnam and Flash is an extremely solid player so he has a chance as well.. but it really wouldn't surprise me to see only Maru get through.. I do think that there is a big difference between "Code S Player" and "Code S contender". This is not to take anything away from the people who made Code S - this is an absolutely ridiculous task to achieve in terms of difficulty..However, there aren't typically 32 "contenders" - as long as I've been watching Code S I haven't ever seen a tournament start out where you weren't at least pretty sure who would be out in the Ro32..
Again there are always exceptions - even the best players of their race can choke in a group (Zest v Taeja) - not that Taeja isn't capable of beating Zest but anyone who actually watched that series would agree that Zest made a series of uncharacteristic mistakes. This is why using isolated games/tournaments can sometimes be counter-intuitive.
On July 24 2014 00:12 MockHamill wrote: I would have preferred: 1) Tanks do more damage. 2) Factories become less expensive. 3) Immortals get less shields. 4) Tempest supply increased to 6.
This change, while helping bio, does not do much for mech.
I have basically stopped watching pro games because mech is not viable at pro level outside of TvT. As a mech player I learn nothing from watching 300+ APM Koreans running around with bio. I have seen it for years and it is simply boring.
Ha, i'm in the same boat. These latest changes make me not watch SC2 any more since bio+WM is boring to see in every game and any mech helping patch seems very unlikely for at least a few months now. Even the hope is gone lol
This is so obviously not a a true statement.
This is definitely either a closet zerg or someone who can't use bio/mine because it requires micro and wants DK to make Terran like Protoss.
Please explain how turtle mech is more entertaining to watch than something that involves multiple armies at different locations on the map / drops / intensive micro / multitask.
Fastest way to kill SC2 in my opinion is to force Terrans to turtle into 1 hour long mech games.. I'm obsessed with starcraft and I don't have the patience to PLAY those games let alone watch them rofl.
Patience is an extremely undervalued skill.
Yes, but when we are talking "game design" I like the fact that all races can be played at a different pace. It is exciting to watch a slower/teching player (as is the case with mech, robo/templar, zerg in general) get absolutely dismantled by an aggressive player (bio, gateway/stargate, usually banes) , just as its fun to watch a slower/teching player hold attack after attack building up to a powerful potentially game ending attack. Both aggressive and defensive styles are necessary to make this game exciting. It gets boring however when both opt to go for the same strategy slower/teching based style, for example mech (and some air toss builds?) vs swarm host based play but this seems to be more of an exception in most games. So yeah, I think the most important issue right now is to change the pace in these match ups. Probably by changing the swarm host, as it was originally meant to be on the offensive/siege up against defensive positions?
It's not really that these defensive styles are boring in itself. It's rather that the units - as you say the SH is the epitome of this - are either just very boring, or kind of in a weird place balancewise - like the Raven or the BC - or plainly unexciting to engage with - Colossus, Tempest, Ultralisk come to mind. I think what you optimally can get out those styles, is a tug-o-war scenario with slow sieges forward and people trying to find weak points and thereby overextending or breaking positions + a lot of harass in the form of units like hellions or zerglings that are a byproduct of the gasintense other units.
But that requires other units than the SH*, who just does not allow the opponent to attack and players need to get punished for not trying to win the tug-o-war, instead of being rewarded with more PDDs, Yamatos and Seekers that give you free value**.
*and also partly the Viper; people often overgo the fact that it is Vipers that are largely responsible for Terrans not being able to move out and just siege when in danger, because "just sieging" is as good as insta-gging against blinding clouds ** that's something they really got right with the Viper. Since it is easy to refill the the energy if you play well, you want to use that energy as often as possible.
Vipers are great IMO as they force Tank spreading. Vipers + SHs on the other hand is terrible because by spreading Tanks you start trading with free units, and that's bad.
There are some games from early HOTS where MVP goes mech and Zerg, don't know who it was, used Viper roach hidra and we saw those "mile long" siege lines ones more. Slowly pushing towards Zerg with spaced out Tanks and Hellions.
For a few weeks i though Blizz finally did it, but alas the SH was discovered TT
I'm not to sure about this. I think it is cool to see macro game slow pushes. But I think it's very hard to push against anything Viper related even when no SHs are around. Sure you can do the extreme spread/slow pushes - and after 2mins of preemtive spreading and leapfrogging you are half-way through the map and the Zerg is countering and you pack everything and go home again.
I think the game you are talking about was Dimaga vs Mvp on Newkirk. That was quite fun, but not only through the Mech buffs, but in general with the much better understanding of the Mech style and the discovery of Ravens these kinds of attacks from the Zerg just don't work. On the flipside, Mvp also cannot really push given how spread he has to be, which means to me that the Zerg should lose when trying that kind of stuff, but it will take a long time, since he shouldn't engage offensively...
The Raven and SH are the worst things to have happen to mech TvZ IMO. The game above is what the general look of the MU should be like.
About fun mech in TvZ, we had a great game today from Bbyong. I think it once again shows that without SHs and Ravens mech can be action packed and a lot of fun. Why doesn't Blizzard just do something about these 2 units already so we can have more of that? TT
On a totally unrelated note but very related to the subject.. Has anyone ever made an attempt at a Deep Blue for SC2?
I understand the mechanics of building it would be a lot different than for chess.. but I feel like it could probably be done...
This would be a pretty sweet answer to the balance questions... and it would be awesome to see top pros fight it lol. Only downside would be the meta would be figured out for you sort of.. and then the possibility of it turning into Skynet and terminator ;p
On July 25 2014 23:52 SatedSC2 wrote: I don't know why people talk about Terran versatility as if Protoss has any versatility. Protoss can't go Skytoss any more than Terran can go Mech/Skyterran...
#BuffTheCarrier
Both cant go skybuild true, however the reason is pretty obivous......
Protoss 1249124124 builds
Terran 1 build.
Protoss Units that are useless in the MU? Tempest/Carrier
Terran units that are useless in the MU? Tanks/Thors/Banshees/Hellions/BC's/Ravens/.
Protoss Strategies: Blink all in, Collsus, Fast Templer, Fast third, etc.......
On July 25 2014 23:52 SatedSC2 wrote: I don't know why people talk about Terran versatility as if Protoss has any versatility. Protoss can't go Skytoss any more than Terran can go Mech/Skyterran...
#BuffTheCarrier
I see Oracles daily, Tempests completely destroy any Mech/BC attempt and Phoenixes/Void Rays have much more utility in PvT than Banshees, Ravens and Battlecruisers will ever have in TvP. Haven't seen a lot of Carriers, although they are kinda like a Siege Tank in the sense that they only shine when you have a critical number of them. (at which point they devastate everything except maybe mass 3/3 Marine if they don't have ground support)
It's a shame because I really like Banshees as a unit and Cloak Banshee was my standard opening back in WoL. It kept Protoss at home and without the threat of Oracles, MSC and Blink it was a stable opener.
Since HotS I have not seen a single Banshee or Battlecruiser in TvP, aside from maybe a Mech attempt.
Granted, straight up Skytoss would likely lose to mass Marine, but Skytoss has much more viability than Skyterran or Mech currently has.
On July 25 2014 23:52 SatedSC2 wrote: I don't know why people talk about Terran versatility as if Protoss has any versatility. Protoss can't go Skytoss any more than Terran can go Mech/Skyterran...
#BuffTheCarrier
Both cant go skybuild true, however the reason is pretty obivous......
Protoss 1249124124 builds
Terran 1 build.
Protoss Units that are useless in the MU? Tempest/Carrier
Terran units that are useless in the MU? Tanks/Thors/Banshees/Hellions/BC's/Ravens/.
Protoss Strategies: Blink all in, Collsus, Fast Templer, Fast third, etc.......
Terran strategies, Drop at 12 min.
Make sense?
Uh hellions, tempest, are used in PVT matches often in top Korean scene what are you talking about? Hellion is a common opener in PVT, Tempest vs Terran works as well, we see people like SoS and other Koreans make it work vs bio on certain maps.
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
The "bio isnt versatile enough" hits the nail. Improvements to SC2 could be implemented with giving terran transitions in and out of mech/air instead of focusing both tvz/p even more on bio mine than it already is.
You do realize that he was being sarcastic right? Bio is THE definition of versatile. You have the most cost efficient army & units & production path & upgrade (air and vehicle upgrade), and now you want to be able to tech switch flawlessly too?
I think a good start would be increasing the gas cost on medicvacs, and separating air & vehicle upgrades again. Make Stim last a shorter amount of time or reduce the overall DPS of the bio army. T is way less gas-constrained than the other 2 races, so they need fewer bases, but at the same time, their bases are easier to defend & harder to destroy.
I would be supportive of tanks getting a 10 damage buff if Bio is nerfed heavily. Medivacs now cost 150 gas, marines now do 1 damage less, stim lasts 75% of current duration, marauder loses 20 health
What in the fuck?
I can't tell if this a total troll post or someone who is just that delusional..
Do you not realize that the patch is to buff T bc it is proven UP?
T is UP in TvP. in TvZ there where much bigger differences in the past (2010 and early 2011 heavily T favored, during BL infestor times heavily Z favored, pre-overseer speedbuff HOTS pretty T favored (not as much as the other 2 times)). right now we see approximately as many T as Z players in GSL Code S next season while there are much more P players.
so this patch doesnt do much to help TvP but probably gonna mess up TvZ. we will see about that but i guess especially WMs will be too strong after this patch in TvZ.
I disagree in terms of the simplicity of the assumptions - The # of code S players is relevant but a very small indicator in my opinion in terms of overall balance. You have to factor in the total picture, not isolate Tvp and Tvz - if P is OP vs T and Z, and Z is OP vs T - you might still have substantially less Z players than P players independent of TvZ due to Protoss eliminating zergs.. and vice versa for # of T players... the individual matchups themselves even have to be considered - for instance Flash beating Symbol and Hush - based on proleague results Flash is a top 5 Terran in the world.. Symbol and Hush are not in the conversation of their race. Innovation same deal - Ruin and Hurricane would not be considered top 5 Protoss players.
Having said that - really in my opinion the ro16 even ro8 results are a better overall indicator.. at this point you typically have the best players of each race squaring off. If a patch doesn't go through before then I would bet my savings you won't see a Terran..maybe Maru will some how get in lol - but we all saw how he did it this past season.
if P is OP vs T and Z and Z OP vs T....why would you get about the same amount of T and Z Code S players next season then? also there are other T players than flash and innovation advancing + you forget to mention P and Z players that advance not because of their race but because of skill like sos, rain, drg etc.
TvZ definetly wasnt broken and i havent heard pros say so. all there was, was a slight Z favor which might turn into a big T favor after thor and especially mine buff which was over the top imo. and most of all buffing T midgame even more just makes it so that Z has to defensive turtle once again and try to somehow get out mass muta or ultras. blizz shouldve buffed lategame T and help T especially in PvT.
Did you read my post? I basically explained exactly how you could get a close to even (though not even) amount of players in code S without the game being balanced. It's hard to answer your question about Tvz being "broken" because that's a pretty vague description - but in terms of it being heavily favored for Z there are plenty of pro players who have said it - not that that makes it relevant whatsoever as pros get paid to WIN the game so I'm not sure why any would honestly say that their race was OP. It's pretty unanimously understood that once Z gets to a critical mass of banelings / mutas there is no real way for the Terran to trade cost effectively and keep up with economy at the same time.. it's very difficult to argue this point. Before the widow-mine nerf this was not the case, there was enough splash to zone out ling/bling/muta a moves so that in the event the game did get to the post -20 min mark the Terran still had a chance to win.. Ultra/Infestor and creep spread mitigate the effect of mines super-late game - not to mention that there is plenty of data that has been analyzed (Post overseer BUFF and Pre Mine NERF) that show a balanced professional metagame in Tvz. It's not difficult to understand why they would test going back to it.. if it does shift to Terran imbalance (which would surprise me) they can always ratchet it back but I really don't see it happening - but only time will tell.
Having said all this - it might be interesting to see the Ro32 code S go down without a patch..I'd throw a hefty wager that Cure, TY and Reality would all be eliminated.. even perhaps Innovation - Bbyong might get out w some Gangnam and Flash is an extremely solid player so he has a chance as well.. but it really wouldn't surprise me to see only Maru get through.. I do think that there is a big difference between "Code S Player" and "Code S contender". This is not to take anything away from the people who made Code S - this is an absolutely ridiculous task to achieve in terms of difficulty..However, there aren't typically 32 "contenders" - as long as I've been watching Code S I haven't ever seen a tournament start out where you weren't at least pretty sure who would be out in the Ro32..
Again there are always exceptions - even the best players of their race can choke in a group (Zest v Taeja) - not that Taeja isn't capable of beating Zest but anyone who actually watched that series would agree that Zest made a series of uncharacteristic mistakes. This is why using isolated games/tournaments can sometimes be counter-intuitive.
yes i read your post. in your other post you say its proven T is UP and in this post you make up some weird theory to prove that. like i said: TvZ is slighty Z favored, nothing more. not broken at all like it has been in early WoL for T and late WoL for Z. so buffing WMs this much + buffing thors might be way too much and especially wont help PvT much since robo + blink builds will be basically as good and only timewarp nerf wont be even closely enough in PvT.
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
The "bio isnt versatile enough" hits the nail. Improvements to SC2 could be implemented with giving terran transitions in and out of mech/air instead of focusing both tvz/p even more on bio mine than it already is.
You do realize that he was being sarcastic right? Bio is THE definition of versatile. You have the most cost efficient army & units & production path & upgrade (air and vehicle upgrade), and now you want to be able to tech switch flawlessly too?
I think a good start would be increasing the gas cost on medicvacs, and separating air & vehicle upgrades again. Make Stim last a shorter amount of time or reduce the overall DPS of the bio army. T is way less gas-constrained than the other 2 races, so they need fewer bases, but at the same time, their bases are easier to defend & harder to destroy.
I would be supportive of tanks getting a 10 damage buff if Bio is nerfed heavily. Medivacs now cost 150 gas, marines now do 1 damage less, stim lasts 75% of current duration, marauder loses 20 health
What in the fuck?
I can't tell if this a total troll post or someone who is just that delusional..
Do you not realize that the patch is to buff T bc it is proven UP?
T is UP in TvP. in TvZ there where much bigger differences in the past (2010 and early 2011 heavily T favored, during BL infestor times heavily Z favored, pre-overseer speedbuff HOTS pretty T favored (not as much as the other 2 times)). right now we see approximately as many T as Z players in GSL Code S next season while there are much more P players.
so this patch doesnt do much to help TvP but probably gonna mess up TvZ. we will see about that but i guess especially WMs will be too strong after this patch in TvZ.
I disagree in terms of the simplicity of the assumptions - The # of code S players is relevant but a very small indicator in my opinion in terms of overall balance. You have to factor in the total picture, not isolate Tvp and Tvz - if P is OP vs T and Z, and Z is OP vs T - you might still have substantially less Z players than P players independent of TvZ due to Protoss eliminating zergs.. and vice versa for # of T players... the individual matchups themselves even have to be considered - for instance Flash beating Symbol and Hush - based on proleague results Flash is a top 5 Terran in the world.. Symbol and Hush are not in the conversation of their race. Innovation same deal - Ruin and Hurricane would not be considered top 5 Protoss players.
Having said that - really in my opinion the ro16 even ro8 results are a better overall indicator.. at this point you typically have the best players of each race squaring off. If a patch doesn't go through before then I would bet my savings you won't see a Terran..maybe Maru will some how get in lol - but we all saw how he did it this past season.
if P is OP vs T and Z and Z OP vs T....why would you get about the same amount of T and Z Code S players next season then? also there are other T players than flash and innovation advancing + you forget to mention P and Z players that advance not because of their race but because of skill like sos, rain, drg etc.
TvZ definetly wasnt broken and i havent heard pros say so. all there was, was a slight Z favor which might turn into a big T favor after thor and especially mine buff which was over the top imo. and most of all buffing T midgame even more just makes it so that Z has to defensive turtle once again and try to somehow get out mass muta or ultras. blizz shouldve buffed lategame T and help T especially in PvT.
Did you read my post? I basically explained exactly how you could get a close to even (though not even) amount of players in code S without the game being balanced. It's hard to answer your question about Tvz being "broken" because that's a pretty vague description - but in terms of it being heavily favored for Z there are plenty of pro players who have said it - not that that makes it relevant whatsoever as pros get paid to WIN the game so I'm not sure why any would honestly say that their race was OP. It's pretty unanimously understood that once Z gets to a critical mass of banelings / mutas there is no real way for the Terran to trade cost effectively and keep up with economy at the same time.. it's very difficult to argue this point. Before the widow-mine nerf this was not the case, there was enough splash to zone out ling/bling/muta a moves so that in the event the game did get to the post -20 min mark the Terran still had a chance to win.. Ultra/Infestor and creep spread mitigate the effect of mines super-late game - not to mention that there is plenty of data that has been analyzed (Post overseer BUFF and Pre Mine NERF) that show a balanced professional metagame in Tvz. It's not difficult to understand why they would test going back to it.. if it does shift to Terran imbalance (which would surprise me) they can always ratchet it back but I really don't see it happening - but only time will tell.
Having said all this - it might be interesting to see the Ro32 code S go down without a patch..I'd throw a hefty wager that Cure, TY and Reality would all be eliminated.. even perhaps Innovation - Bbyong might get out w some Gangnam and Flash is an extremely solid player so he has a chance as well.. but it really wouldn't surprise me to see only Maru get through.. I do think that there is a big difference between "Code S Player" and "Code S contender". This is not to take anything away from the people who made Code S - this is an absolutely ridiculous task to achieve in terms of difficulty..However, there aren't typically 32 "contenders" - as long as I've been watching Code S I haven't ever seen a tournament start out where you weren't at least pretty sure who would be out in the Ro32..
Again there are always exceptions - even the best players of their race can choke in a group (Zest v Taeja) - not that Taeja isn't capable of beating Zest but anyone who actually watched that series would agree that Zest made a series of uncharacteristic mistakes. This is why using isolated games/tournaments can sometimes be counter-intuitive.
yes i read your post. in your other post you say its proven T is UP and in this post you make up some weird theory to prove that. like i said: TvZ is slighty Z favored, nothing more. not broken at all like it has been in early WoL for T and late WoL for Z. so buffing WMs this much + buffing thors might be way too much and especially wont help PvT much since robo + blink builds will be basically as good and only timewarp nerf wont be even closely enough in PvT.
lol - ok done taking your responses seriously - maybe it's a language barrier thing but doesn't seem to be sinking in. Nobody said it was broken like WOL - just that it was imbalanaced in Z's favor...it's not a weird theory - it's reality - get over it... Thors aren't being buffed they just attack mutas now instead of lings, which if you are a high level player you do anyway.. WMs weren't broken before they were nerfed, period. You are lashing out like a little kid bc you're going to have to micro vs WM again - patch hasn't even gone through yet and already the whining starts.. hopefully this time they'll wait till their is actually some kind of statistical imbalance before nerfing the only unit comp that works in Tvz.
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
The "bio isnt versatile enough" hits the nail. Improvements to SC2 could be implemented with giving terran transitions in and out of mech/air instead of focusing both tvz/p even more on bio mine than it already is.
You do realize that he was being sarcastic right? Bio is THE definition of versatile. You have the most cost efficient army & units & production path & upgrade (air and vehicle upgrade), and now you want to be able to tech switch flawlessly too?
I think a good start would be increasing the gas cost on medicvacs, and separating air & vehicle upgrades again. Make Stim last a shorter amount of time or reduce the overall DPS of the bio army. T is way less gas-constrained than the other 2 races, so they need fewer bases, but at the same time, their bases are easier to defend & harder to destroy.
I would be supportive of tanks getting a 10 damage buff if Bio is nerfed heavily. Medivacs now cost 150 gas, marines now do 1 damage less, stim lasts 75% of current duration, marauder loses 20 health
What in the fuck?
I can't tell if this a total troll post or someone who is just that delusional..
Do you not realize that the patch is to buff T bc it is proven UP?
T is UP in TvP. in TvZ there where much bigger differences in the past (2010 and early 2011 heavily T favored, during BL infestor times heavily Z favored, pre-overseer speedbuff HOTS pretty T favored (not as much as the other 2 times)). right now we see approximately as many T as Z players in GSL Code S next season while there are much more P players.
so this patch doesnt do much to help TvP but probably gonna mess up TvZ. we will see about that but i guess especially WMs will be too strong after this patch in TvZ.
I disagree in terms of the simplicity of the assumptions - The # of code S players is relevant but a very small indicator in my opinion in terms of overall balance. You have to factor in the total picture, not isolate Tvp and Tvz - if P is OP vs T and Z, and Z is OP vs T - you might still have substantially less Z players than P players independent of TvZ due to Protoss eliminating zergs.. and vice versa for # of T players... the individual matchups themselves even have to be considered - for instance Flash beating Symbol and Hush - based on proleague results Flash is a top 5 Terran in the world.. Symbol and Hush are not in the conversation of their race. Innovation same deal - Ruin and Hurricane would not be considered top 5 Protoss players.
Having said that - really in my opinion the ro16 even ro8 results are a better overall indicator.. at this point you typically have the best players of each race squaring off. If a patch doesn't go through before then I would bet my savings you won't see a Terran..maybe Maru will some how get in lol - but we all saw how he did it this past season.
if P is OP vs T and Z and Z OP vs T....why would you get about the same amount of T and Z Code S players next season then? also there are other T players than flash and innovation advancing + you forget to mention P and Z players that advance not because of their race but because of skill like sos, rain, drg etc.
TvZ definetly wasnt broken and i havent heard pros say so. all there was, was a slight Z favor which might turn into a big T favor after thor and especially mine buff which was over the top imo. and most of all buffing T midgame even more just makes it so that Z has to defensive turtle once again and try to somehow get out mass muta or ultras. blizz shouldve buffed lategame T and help T especially in PvT.
Did you read my post? I basically explained exactly how you could get a close to even (though not even) amount of players in code S without the game being balanced. It's hard to answer your question about Tvz being "broken" because that's a pretty vague description - but in terms of it being heavily favored for Z there are plenty of pro players who have said it - not that that makes it relevant whatsoever as pros get paid to WIN the game so I'm not sure why any would honestly say that their race was OP. It's pretty unanimously understood that once Z gets to a critical mass of banelings / mutas there is no real way for the Terran to trade cost effectively and keep up with economy at the same time.. it's very difficult to argue this point. Before the widow-mine nerf this was not the case, there was enough splash to zone out ling/bling/muta a moves so that in the event the game did get to the post -20 min mark the Terran still had a chance to win.. Ultra/Infestor and creep spread mitigate the effect of mines super-late game - not to mention that there is plenty of data that has been analyzed (Post overseer BUFF and Pre Mine NERF) that show a balanced professional metagame in Tvz. It's not difficult to understand why they would test going back to it.. if it does shift to Terran imbalance (which would surprise me) they can always ratchet it back but I really don't see it happening - but only time will tell.
Having said all this - it might be interesting to see the Ro32 code S go down without a patch..I'd throw a hefty wager that Cure, TY and Reality would all be eliminated.. even perhaps Innovation - Bbyong might get out w some Gangnam and Flash is an extremely solid player so he has a chance as well.. but it really wouldn't surprise me to see only Maru get through.. I do think that there is a big difference between "Code S Player" and "Code S contender". This is not to take anything away from the people who made Code S - this is an absolutely ridiculous task to achieve in terms of difficulty..However, there aren't typically 32 "contenders" - as long as I've been watching Code S I haven't ever seen a tournament start out where you weren't at least pretty sure who would be out in the Ro32..
Again there are always exceptions - even the best players of their race can choke in a group (Zest v Taeja) - not that Taeja isn't capable of beating Zest but anyone who actually watched that series would agree that Zest made a series of uncharacteristic mistakes. This is why using isolated games/tournaments can sometimes be counter-intuitive.
yes i read your post. in your other post you say its proven T is UP and in this post you make up some weird theory to prove that. like i said: TvZ is slighty Z favored, nothing more. not broken at all like it has been in early WoL for T and late WoL for Z. so buffing WMs this much + buffing thors might be way too much and especially wont help PvT much since robo + blink builds will be basically as good and only timewarp nerf wont be even closely enough in PvT.
lol - ok done taking your responses seriously - maybe it's a language barrier thing but doesn't seem to be sinking in. Nobody said it was broken like WOL - just that it was imbalanaced in Z's favor...it's not a weird theory - it's reality - get over it... Thors aren't being buffed they just attack mutas now instead of lings, which if you are a high level player you do anyway.. WMs weren't broken before they were nerfed, period. You are lashing out like a little kid bc you're going to have to micro vs WM again - patch hasn't even gone through yet and already the whining starts.. hopefully this time they'll wait till their is actually some kind of statistical imbalance before nerfing the only unit comp that works in Tvz.
its not broken but imbalanced in Zs favor. thats what you say. havent heard any top pros say so. all i heard was Z is slightly favored but far from a real imbalance. also i am playing T since 2 months and having a lot of fun with WMs already so i am not sad about WM buff and yes WM were broken, thats why TvZ was heavily T favored in the first 6 months or so in TvZ which got a bit better after overseer buffs but it was still slightly T favored after that.
the biggest point you dont seem to understand is that WMs are fine and midgame TvZ is more than fine for T. what T would really need in TvZ but especially in TvP would be a better lategame. that is what you dont seem to get. we can also buff bunker build time and balance the game that way...would still be stupid since it would balance the game but not fix T lategame. just because a MU has 50% winrate doesnt mean its in a good state, see soultrain + archon toilet vs BL infestor PvZ in WoL which made PvZ 50% winrate but absolutely unfun and stupid.
--> dont buff WMs that hard (midgame is fine anyway for T) and buff T lategame to compensate for the weakness there.
The "bio isnt versatile enough" hits the nail. Improvements to SC2 could be implemented with giving terran transitions in and out of mech/air instead of focusing both tvz/p even more on bio mine than it already is.
You do realize that he was being sarcastic right? Bio is THE definition of versatile. You have the most cost efficient army & units & production path & upgrade (air and vehicle upgrade), and now you want to be able to tech switch flawlessly too?
I think a good start would be increasing the gas cost on medicvacs, and separating air & vehicle upgrades again. Make Stim last a shorter amount of time or reduce the overall DPS of the bio army. T is way less gas-constrained than the other 2 races, so they need fewer bases, but at the same time, their bases are easier to defend & harder to destroy.
I would be supportive of tanks getting a 10 damage buff if Bio is nerfed heavily. Medivacs now cost 150 gas, marines now do 1 damage less, stim lasts 75% of current duration, marauder loses 20 health
What in the fuck?
I can't tell if this a total troll post or someone who is just that delusional..
Do you not realize that the patch is to buff T bc it is proven UP?
T is UP in TvP. in TvZ there where much bigger differences in the past (2010 and early 2011 heavily T favored, during BL infestor times heavily Z favored, pre-overseer speedbuff HOTS pretty T favored (not as much as the other 2 times)). right now we see approximately as many T as Z players in GSL Code S next season while there are much more P players.
so this patch doesnt do much to help TvP but probably gonna mess up TvZ. we will see about that but i guess especially WMs will be too strong after this patch in TvZ.
I disagree in terms of the simplicity of the assumptions - The # of code S players is relevant but a very small indicator in my opinion in terms of overall balance. You have to factor in the total picture, not isolate Tvp and Tvz - if P is OP vs T and Z, and Z is OP vs T - you might still have substantially less Z players than P players independent of TvZ due to Protoss eliminating zergs.. and vice versa for # of T players... the individual matchups themselves even have to be considered - for instance Flash beating Symbol and Hush - based on proleague results Flash is a top 5 Terran in the world.. Symbol and Hush are not in the conversation of their race. Innovation same deal - Ruin and Hurricane would not be considered top 5 Protoss players.
Having said that - really in my opinion the ro16 even ro8 results are a better overall indicator.. at this point you typically have the best players of each race squaring off. If a patch doesn't go through before then I would bet my savings you won't see a Terran..maybe Maru will some how get in lol - but we all saw how he did it this past season.
if P is OP vs T and Z and Z OP vs T....why would you get about the same amount of T and Z Code S players next season then? also there are other T players than flash and innovation advancing + you forget to mention P and Z players that advance not because of their race but because of skill like sos, rain, drg etc.
TvZ definetly wasnt broken and i havent heard pros say so. all there was, was a slight Z favor which might turn into a big T favor after thor and especially mine buff which was over the top imo. and most of all buffing T midgame even more just makes it so that Z has to defensive turtle once again and try to somehow get out mass muta or ultras. blizz shouldve buffed lategame T and help T especially in PvT.
Did you read my post? I basically explained exactly how you could get a close to even (though not even) amount of players in code S without the game being balanced. It's hard to answer your question about Tvz being "broken" because that's a pretty vague description - but in terms of it being heavily favored for Z there are plenty of pro players who have said it - not that that makes it relevant whatsoever as pros get paid to WIN the game so I'm not sure why any would honestly say that their race was OP. It's pretty unanimously understood that once Z gets to a critical mass of banelings / mutas there is no real way for the Terran to trade cost effectively and keep up with economy at the same time.. it's very difficult to argue this point. Before the widow-mine nerf this was not the case, there was enough splash to zone out ling/bling/muta a moves so that in the event the game did get to the post -20 min mark the Terran still had a chance to win.. Ultra/Infestor and creep spread mitigate the effect of mines super-late game - not to mention that there is plenty of data that has been analyzed (Post overseer BUFF and Pre Mine NERF) that show a balanced professional metagame in Tvz. It's not difficult to understand why they would test going back to it.. if it does shift to Terran imbalance (which would surprise me) they can always ratchet it back but I really don't see it happening - but only time will tell.
Having said all this - it might be interesting to see the Ro32 code S go down without a patch..I'd throw a hefty wager that Cure, TY and Reality would all be eliminated.. even perhaps Innovation - Bbyong might get out w some Gangnam and Flash is an extremely solid player so he has a chance as well.. but it really wouldn't surprise me to see only Maru get through.. I do think that there is a big difference between "Code S Player" and "Code S contender". This is not to take anything away from the people who made Code S - this is an absolutely ridiculous task to achieve in terms of difficulty..However, there aren't typically 32 "contenders" - as long as I've been watching Code S I haven't ever seen a tournament start out where you weren't at least pretty sure who would be out in the Ro32..
Again there are always exceptions - even the best players of their race can choke in a group (Zest v Taeja) - not that Taeja isn't capable of beating Zest but anyone who actually watched that series would agree that Zest made a series of uncharacteristic mistakes. This is why using isolated games/tournaments can sometimes be counter-intuitive.
yes i read your post. in your other post you say its proven T is UP and in this post you make up some weird theory to prove that. like i said: TvZ is slighty Z favored, nothing more. not broken at all like it has been in early WoL for T and late WoL for Z. so buffing WMs this much + buffing thors might be way too much and especially wont help PvT much since robo + blink builds will be basically as good and only timewarp nerf wont be even closely enough in PvT.
lol - ok done taking your responses seriously - maybe it's a language barrier thing but doesn't seem to be sinking in. Nobody said it was broken like WOL - just that it was imbalanaced in Z's favor...it's not a weird theory - it's reality - get over it... Thors aren't being buffed they just attack mutas now instead of lings, which if you are a high level player you do anyway.. WMs weren't broken before they were nerfed, period. You are lashing out like a little kid bc you're going to have to micro vs WM again - patch hasn't even gone through yet and already the whining starts.. hopefully this time they'll wait till their is actually some kind of statistical imbalance before nerfing the only unit comp that works in Tvz.
its not broken but imbalanced in Zs favor. thats what you say. havent heard any top pros say so. all i heard was Z is slightly favored but far from a real imbalance. also i am playing T since 2 months and having a lot of fun with WMs already so i am not sad about WM buff and yes WM were broken, thats why TvZ was heavily T favored in the first 6 months or so in TvZ which got a bit better after overseer buffs but it was still slightly T favored after that.
the biggest point you dont seem to understand is that WMs are fine and midgame TvZ is more than fine for T. what T would really need in TvZ but especially in TvP would be a better lategame. that is what you dont seem to get. we can also buff bunker build time and balance the game that way...would still be stupid since it would balance the game but not fix T lategame. just because a MU has 50% winrate doesnt mean its in a good state, see soultrain + archon toilet vs BL infestor PvZ in WoL which made PvZ 50% winrate but absolutely unfun and stupid.
--> dont buff WMs that hard (midgame is fine anyway for T) and buff T lategame to compensate for the weakness there.
Overseer buff only made things a "bit better"? Seriously, the overseer speed buff really unleashed mass muta since it became so much easier to get detection at far locations (and thus snipe mines). The overseer buff was a huge nerf to mines.
On July 26 2014 01:02 DomeGetta wrote: On a totally unrelated note but very related to the subject.. Has anyone ever made an attempt at a Deep Blue for SC2?
I understand the mechanics of building it would be a lot different than for chess.. but I feel like it could probably be done...
People have tried to build AIs for RTS games but it isn't really comparable to chess.
Chess is a game of complete information, disctete turns, and a relatively small number of possible moves per timestep.
A RTS game has incomplete information, continuous time, and billions of possible inputs at any given point in time (even though almost all of them will be pointless).
Every one of those traits makes SC2 incomparably more difficult for a computer than chess. Its like playing poker for chess pieces on a 10000x10000 square grid. (Humans still beat computers at poker BTW).
On July 26 2014 01:02 DomeGetta wrote: On a totally unrelated note but very related to the subject.. Has anyone ever made an attempt at a Deep Blue for SC2?
I understand the mechanics of building it would be a lot different than for chess.. but I feel like it could probably be done...
People have tried to build AIs for RTS games but it isn't really comparable to chess.
Chess is a game of complete information, disctete turns, and a relatively small number of possible moves per timestep.
A RTS game has incomplete information, continuous time, and billions of possible inputs at any given point in time (even though almost all of them will be pointless).
Every one of those traits makes SC2 incomparably more difficult for a computer than chess. Its like playing poker for chess pieces on a 10000x10000 square grid. (Humans still beat computers at poker BTW).
Yah I hear you on that - but I still feel like you could feedback info to the program the same way humans do it with scouting..If / then If / then.. all the macro would be easy, the micro as well I feel would be do-able... the thing that would be hard I feel is setting up tactical attacks.. it probably would just try to defend super hard and expand...I'm not sure.. even though I don't think you could make a totally unbeatable program you probably could make something very good and difficult to beat.. ^^
As a starting point you could just model perfectly executed build orders from pro games..and then try to work in the scout/respond aspect..I write software as part of my job I would love to work on something like this lol.
You do realize that he was being sarcastic right? Bio is THE definition of versatile. You have the most cost efficient army & units & production path & upgrade (air and vehicle upgrade), and now you want to be able to tech switch flawlessly too?
I think a good start would be increasing the gas cost on medicvacs, and separating air & vehicle upgrades again. Make Stim last a shorter amount of time or reduce the overall DPS of the bio army. T is way less gas-constrained than the other 2 races, so they need fewer bases, but at the same time, their bases are easier to defend & harder to destroy.
I would be supportive of tanks getting a 10 damage buff if Bio is nerfed heavily. Medivacs now cost 150 gas, marines now do 1 damage less, stim lasts 75% of current duration, marauder loses 20 health
What in the fuck?
I can't tell if this a total troll post or someone who is just that delusional..
Do you not realize that the patch is to buff T bc it is proven UP?
T is UP in TvP. in TvZ there where much bigger differences in the past (2010 and early 2011 heavily T favored, during BL infestor times heavily Z favored, pre-overseer speedbuff HOTS pretty T favored (not as much as the other 2 times)). right now we see approximately as many T as Z players in GSL Code S next season while there are much more P players.
so this patch doesnt do much to help TvP but probably gonna mess up TvZ. we will see about that but i guess especially WMs will be too strong after this patch in TvZ.
I disagree in terms of the simplicity of the assumptions - The # of code S players is relevant but a very small indicator in my opinion in terms of overall balance. You have to factor in the total picture, not isolate Tvp and Tvz - if P is OP vs T and Z, and Z is OP vs T - you might still have substantially less Z players than P players independent of TvZ due to Protoss eliminating zergs.. and vice versa for # of T players... the individual matchups themselves even have to be considered - for instance Flash beating Symbol and Hush - based on proleague results Flash is a top 5 Terran in the world.. Symbol and Hush are not in the conversation of their race. Innovation same deal - Ruin and Hurricane would not be considered top 5 Protoss players.
Having said that - really in my opinion the ro16 even ro8 results are a better overall indicator.. at this point you typically have the best players of each race squaring off. If a patch doesn't go through before then I would bet my savings you won't see a Terran..maybe Maru will some how get in lol - but we all saw how he did it this past season.
if P is OP vs T and Z and Z OP vs T....why would you get about the same amount of T and Z Code S players next season then? also there are other T players than flash and innovation advancing + you forget to mention P and Z players that advance not because of their race but because of skill like sos, rain, drg etc.
TvZ definetly wasnt broken and i havent heard pros say so. all there was, was a slight Z favor which might turn into a big T favor after thor and especially mine buff which was over the top imo. and most of all buffing T midgame even more just makes it so that Z has to defensive turtle once again and try to somehow get out mass muta or ultras. blizz shouldve buffed lategame T and help T especially in PvT.
Did you read my post? I basically explained exactly how you could get a close to even (though not even) amount of players in code S without the game being balanced. It's hard to answer your question about Tvz being "broken" because that's a pretty vague description - but in terms of it being heavily favored for Z there are plenty of pro players who have said it - not that that makes it relevant whatsoever as pros get paid to WIN the game so I'm not sure why any would honestly say that their race was OP. It's pretty unanimously understood that once Z gets to a critical mass of banelings / mutas there is no real way for the Terran to trade cost effectively and keep up with economy at the same time.. it's very difficult to argue this point. Before the widow-mine nerf this was not the case, there was enough splash to zone out ling/bling/muta a moves so that in the event the game did get to the post -20 min mark the Terran still had a chance to win.. Ultra/Infestor and creep spread mitigate the effect of mines super-late game - not to mention that there is plenty of data that has been analyzed (Post overseer BUFF and Pre Mine NERF) that show a balanced professional metagame in Tvz. It's not difficult to understand why they would test going back to it.. if it does shift to Terran imbalance (which would surprise me) they can always ratchet it back but I really don't see it happening - but only time will tell.
Having said all this - it might be interesting to see the Ro32 code S go down without a patch..I'd throw a hefty wager that Cure, TY and Reality would all be eliminated.. even perhaps Innovation - Bbyong might get out w some Gangnam and Flash is an extremely solid player so he has a chance as well.. but it really wouldn't surprise me to see only Maru get through.. I do think that there is a big difference between "Code S Player" and "Code S contender". This is not to take anything away from the people who made Code S - this is an absolutely ridiculous task to achieve in terms of difficulty..However, there aren't typically 32 "contenders" - as long as I've been watching Code S I haven't ever seen a tournament start out where you weren't at least pretty sure who would be out in the Ro32..
Again there are always exceptions - even the best players of their race can choke in a group (Zest v Taeja) - not that Taeja isn't capable of beating Zest but anyone who actually watched that series would agree that Zest made a series of uncharacteristic mistakes. This is why using isolated games/tournaments can sometimes be counter-intuitive.
yes i read your post. in your other post you say its proven T is UP and in this post you make up some weird theory to prove that. like i said: TvZ is slighty Z favored, nothing more. not broken at all like it has been in early WoL for T and late WoL for Z. so buffing WMs this much + buffing thors might be way too much and especially wont help PvT much since robo + blink builds will be basically as good and only timewarp nerf wont be even closely enough in PvT.
lol - ok done taking your responses seriously - maybe it's a language barrier thing but doesn't seem to be sinking in. Nobody said it was broken like WOL - just that it was imbalanaced in Z's favor...it's not a weird theory - it's reality - get over it... Thors aren't being buffed they just attack mutas now instead of lings, which if you are a high level player you do anyway.. WMs weren't broken before they were nerfed, period. You are lashing out like a little kid bc you're going to have to micro vs WM again - patch hasn't even gone through yet and already the whining starts.. hopefully this time they'll wait till their is actually some kind of statistical imbalance before nerfing the only unit comp that works in Tvz.
its not broken but imbalanced in Zs favor. thats what you say. havent heard any top pros say so. all i heard was Z is slightly favored but far from a real imbalance. also i am playing T since 2 months and having a lot of fun with WMs already so i am not sad about WM buff and yes WM were broken, thats why TvZ was heavily T favored in the first 6 months or so in TvZ which got a bit better after overseer buffs but it was still slightly T favored after that.
the biggest point you dont seem to understand is that WMs are fine and midgame TvZ is more than fine for T. what T would really need in TvZ but especially in TvP would be a better lategame. that is what you dont seem to get. we can also buff bunker build time and balance the game that way...would still be stupid since it would balance the game but not fix T lategame. just because a MU has 50% winrate doesnt mean its in a good state, see soultrain + archon toilet vs BL infestor PvZ in WoL which made PvZ 50% winrate but absolutely unfun and stupid.
--> dont buff WMs that hard (midgame is fine anyway for T) and buff T lategame to compensate for the weakness there.
Overseer buff only made things a "bit better"? Seriously, the overseer speed buff really unleashed mass muta since it became so much easier to get detection at far locations (and thus snipe mines). The overseer buff was a huge nerf to mines.
Haha yeah - "I'm playing T for 2 months" = A zerg who offraces some, who can't micro vs Widow Mines and is crying/whining about the patch. "The biggest point" that you are totally pulling out of your ass is that widowmines are not fine and can be a moved by max ling/bane armies - and your point about late game also makes no sense because mara/mine/mede is the normal comp off bio based openings vs ultra late game tech.. so yes, it is also a buff to late game.
On July 25 2014 17:10 darkscream wrote: "hmmm, terran is losing to protoss.. i know, lets just buff their lowest attention/APM unit so it's always good in every situation against everything, since Bio just isn't versatile enough"
--Blizzard
The "bio isnt versatile enough" hits the nail. Improvements to SC2 could be implemented with giving terran transitions in and out of mech/air instead of focusing both tvz/p even more on bio mine than it already is.
You do realize that he was being sarcastic right? Bio is THE definition of versatile. You have the most cost efficient army & units & production path & upgrade (air and vehicle upgrade), and now you want to be able to tech switch flawlessly too?
I think a good start would be increasing the gas cost on medicvacs, and separating air & vehicle upgrades again. Make Stim last a shorter amount of time or reduce the overall DPS of the bio army. T is way less gas-constrained than the other 2 races, so they need fewer bases, but at the same time, their bases are easier to defend & harder to destroy.
I would be supportive of tanks getting a 10 damage buff if Bio is nerfed heavily. Medivacs now cost 150 gas, marines now do 1 damage less, stim lasts 75% of current duration, marauder loses 20 health
You really are the funny guy. Have you ever see a competitive match ? Nerfing only one of your proposition would destroy the terran race for good.
Btw, bio is more cost effective but there is probably no game where the terran win more ressource lost than the opponent. But he contrary is in nno way true.
And for people saying Z aren't way stronger than T :
On July 24 2014 15:32 Ghanburighan wrote: While we're looking at winrates, here's another Aligulac list:
Just looking at winrates, PvT is rather even, and so is PvZ but TvZ has gone down to the dumps again.
On the other hand, the population numbers are the worst ever for Terran. It looks like T has a constant of around 100 games every period, but with the added number of games (last period has 1799 games, this one 3866), only Z and P seem to have added more mirrors.
So there are 4.8x as many ZvZ as TvT, and 3.8x as many PvP as TvT. This also means that P has once again caught up with Z populations, last period it was 1.3 ZvZ for every 1 PvP, now it's 1.2.
On July 10 2014 20:15 Ghanburighan wrote: Here's the latest Aligulac list (114) with pretty new formatting.
With regard to P, nothing seems to have changed. Just like the first half of June, P>T by a slight margin, P and Z are roughly even, and there are roughly the same number of PvP MU's in tournaments.
Z did worse in this period, while it was at >55% against T last time, it's now even in winrates.
More importantly, looking at populations, while there were 5x more ZvZ than TvT, and 2x more ZvZ than PvP, then now there are only roughly 3x more ZvZ than TvT, and a just over a fourth more ZvZ than PvPs. This suggests that Z is doing worse, and it's mainly doing worse against T (note that worse doesn't imply that they're doing bad, this is a comparison with the previous period).
Looking more closely at the population numbers, there appear to have been fewer games, the total for 114 is 1835 and for 113 it was 2379.
So for the previous 113 list Z MUs made up 72% of all MUs. P MUs made up 55% (note that the overlap is due to the fact that P plays Z...). T MUs made up 36% of all MUs.
In this list, 114, Z MUs made up 65% of all MUs. P MUs made up 57%. T MUs made up 42% of all MUs.
So Z is down 7%, P is up 2% and T is up 6%. (with rounding)
The previous lists can be found below.
On June 29 2014 05:42 Ghanburighan wrote: Sorry for the delay, here's Aligulac 113.. The previous list(s) can be found at the end of this post.
Looking at the winrates, P has extended its advantage over T, P has also gained some ground back against Z, yet TvZ has strongly turned in Z favour once gain (it's as bad as it was before the hellbat patch in April).
Population numbers are also worse. Previously there were 4x more ZvZ games than TvT games, now there are more than 5x. PvP's have not changed in number, so it's mostly just less terrans and more zergs getting further that's creating the problem.
All in all, balance-wise this was a very depressing period.
On June 12 2014 15:32 Ghanburighan wrote: Time to post the latest Aligulac list. The previous list can be found at the end of this post.
Regarding winrates, PvT has fluctuated back from T having a slight advantage to P having a minuscule advantage. In PvZ, P has also improved although it hasn't caught up with Z. On the other hand, T has improved in the TvZ MU (110 had 45%, 111 had 47%) and its even now.
In terms of populations measured in numbers of mirror MUs, there's virtually no change compared to the last list, the proportions are very close. This means that there is no repopulation of terrans according to these numbers and there are 4 times fewer TvTs than ZvZs.
As T MUs have even winrates, there cannot really be a repopulation with these numbers.
Furthermore, a word of caution, I'd say that this was one of the best periods for Terran in a long while, Taeja won Hsc 9 (where Z had a comparatively weaker list of players), Maru is tearing up Code S, and Innovation is kicking as in teamleagues and the Dragon cup. I don't think they contributed overly much to the final winrates (their games are still a small fraction of all the games), but taken together they did contribute significantly. If they don't keep their winning ways going, winrates can plunge below 50% again. And, their wins aren't helping repopulate in any way.
On May 29 2014 02:45 Ghanburighan wrote: Uploading the latest Aligulac list.
Unfortunately there was a TvZ patch in the middle of the period, so those numbers could be anything now.
But it looks like P is doing worse against Z in terms of winrate. But the population ratios haven't changed compared to the last list, though. It's still roughly 1/4 TvT, 2/4 PvP and 1/1 ZvZ.
I must not have been following this patch closely enough because it was a huge damn surprise to me when I read just now that the widow mine splash radius doesn't have tiers anymore. 40(+40 shield) for the full radius is completely insane to me o_O
On July 26 2014 05:51 KrazyTrumpet wrote: I must not have been following this patch closely enough because it was a huge damn surprise to me when I read just now that the widow mine splash radius doesn't have tiers anymore. 40(+40 shield) for the full radius is completely insane to me o_O
I mean, what good are zealots if you can't just blindly a-move them??
IMO the stalker was not designed with Kespa level blink micro in mind and is currently too strong because of that. Blizzard should think about having it do 10 flat damage since Immortals are already good against armored units and come out shortly after stalkers anyway.
On July 26 2014 06:14 Cheren wrote: IMO the stalker was not designed with Kespa level blink micro in mind and is currently too strong because of that. Blizzard should think about having it do 10 flat damage since Immortals are already good against armored units and come out shortly after stalkers anyway.
No, we shouldn't nerf the one mechanic that Protoss has that rewards the user for better micro.
Instead, we should re-design more units to do the same for all 3 races.
On July 26 2014 06:14 Cheren wrote: IMO the stalker was not designed with Kespa level blink micro in mind and is currently too strong because of that. Blizzard should think about having it do 10 flat damage since Immortals are already good against armored units and come out shortly after stalkers anyway.
No, we shouldn't nerf the one mechanic that Protoss has that rewards the user for better micro.
Instead, we should re-design more units to do the same for all 3 races.
That's true, but only when you realistically can add countermicro to the unit.
So for instance if one player can micro unit X really well and become a lot more cost-effective. Then the enemy player should be able to remicro agianst the micro of unit X in order to neutralize the micro as well (assuming he is good).
The issue with blink-stalkers is that the micro is one-sided. If the protoss has really good micro he becomes a lot more cost-effective, however it's almost impossible for the enemy to have any countermicro plays against it (at least in the earlier midgame).
On July 26 2014 05:51 KrazyTrumpet wrote: I must not have been following this patch closely enough because it was a huge damn surprise to me when I read just now that the widow mine splash radius doesn't have tiers anymore. 40(+40 shield) for the full radius is completely insane to me o_O
I mean, what good are zealots if you can't just blindly a-move them??
On July 26 2014 06:14 Cheren wrote: IMO the stalker was not designed with Kespa level blink micro in mind and is currently too strong because of that. Blizzard should think about having it do 10 flat damage since Immortals are already good against armored units and come out shortly after stalkers anyway.
No, we shouldn't nerf the one mechanic that Protoss has that rewards the user for better micro.
Instead, we should re-design more units to do the same for all 3 races.
That's true, but only when you realistically can add countermicro to the unit.
So for instance if one player can micro unit X really well and become a lot more cost-effective. Then the enemy player should be able to remicro agianst the micro of unit X in order to neutralize the micro as well (assuming he is good).
The issue with blink-stalkers is that the micro is one-sided. If the protoss has really good micro he becomes a lot more cost-effective, however it's almost impossible for the enemy to have any countermicro plays against it (at least in the earlier midgame).
Bad argument. Same is true of Stim, should we remove Stim because it makes bio too strong when played by Kespa players?
If Stalkers are too strong for a unit that maneuverable, they could be made weaker. (I'd like to see a version with higher DPS and lower shields) On top of that, the way Stalkers are used is very different from the way micro-intensive Terran units are used. Stalkers don't do a lot of "high risk high reward" type pokes, like you don't see four groups of Stalkers attacking key positions all over the map at the same time. Protoss midgame doesn't work like that (thx Colossus). With a different midgame, we could absolutely see Stalkers used differently, and have a higher degree of risk attached to their use.
On July 26 2014 06:14 Cheren wrote: IMO the stalker was not designed with Kespa level blink micro in mind and is currently too strong because of that. Blizzard should think about having it do 10 flat damage since Immortals are already good against armored units and come out shortly after stalkers anyway.
No, we shouldn't nerf the one mechanic that Protoss has that rewards the user for better micro.
Instead, we should re-design more units to do the same for all 3 races.
That's true, but only when you realistically can add countermicro to the unit.
So for instance if one player can micro unit X really well and become a lot more cost-effective. Then the enemy player should be able to remicro agianst the micro of unit X in order to neutralize the micro as well (assuming he is good).
The issue with blink-stalkers is that the micro is one-sided. If the protoss has really good micro he becomes a lot more cost-effective, however it's almost impossible for the enemy to have any countermicro plays against it (at least in the earlier midgame).
Bad argument. Same is true of Stim, should we remove Stim because it makes bio too strong when played by Kespa players?
If Stalkers are too strong for a unit that maneuverable, they could be made weaker. (I'd like to see a version with higher DPS and lower shields) On top of that, the way Stalkers are used is very different from the way micro-intensive Terran units are used. Stalkers don't do a lot of "high risk high reward" type pokes, like you don't see four groups of Stalkers attacking key positions all over the map at the same time. Protoss midgame doesn't work like that (thx Colossus). With a different midgame, we could absolutely see Stalkers used differently, and have a higher degree of risk attached to their use.
No. Everything that occurs after you activate stim creates a ton of new microinteractions. Like bio splitting vs Banelings/storm becomes practical after you have activated stim.
When blink is being used, no remicro becomes possible.
That's why in my opinion, blink should be more about multitask/harass-oriented situations than about something that has the potential to outright kill the enemy.
On July 26 2014 06:14 Cheren wrote: IMO the stalker was not designed with Kespa level blink micro in mind and is currently too strong because of that. Blizzard should think about having it do 10 flat damage since Immortals are already good against armored units and come out shortly after stalkers anyway.
No, we shouldn't nerf the one mechanic that Protoss has that rewards the user for better micro.
Instead, we should re-design more units to do the same for all 3 races.
That's true, but only when you realistically can add countermicro to the unit.
So for instance if one player can micro unit X really well and become a lot more cost-effective. Then the enemy player should be able to remicro agianst the micro of unit X in order to neutralize the micro as well (assuming he is good).
The issue with blink-stalkers is that the micro is one-sided. If the protoss has really good micro he becomes a lot more cost-effective, however it's almost impossible for the enemy to have any countermicro plays against it (at least in the earlier midgame).
Bad argument. Same is true of Stim, should we remove Stim because it makes bio too strong when played by Kespa players?
If Stalkers are too strong for a unit that maneuverable, they could be made weaker. (I'd like to see a version with higher DPS and lower shields) On top of that, the way Stalkers are used is very different from the way micro-intensive Terran units are used. Stalkers don't do a lot of "high risk high reward" type pokes, like you don't see four groups of Stalkers attacking key positions all over the map at the same time. Protoss midgame doesn't work like that (thx Colossus). With a different midgame, we could absolutely see Stalkers used differently, and have a higher degree of risk attached to their use.
No. Everything that occurs after you activate stim creates a ton of new microinteractions. Like bio splitting vs Banelings/storm becomes practical after you have activated stim.
When blink is being used, no remicro becomes possible.
That's why in my opinion, blink should be more about multitask/harass-oriented situations than about something that has the potential to outright kill the enemy.
There are tons of counter-micro possibilities to Blink. Making sure your units continue attacking the damaged Stalker so it can't regenerate shields, making sure your units DON'T continue attacking the damaged Stalker so they don't get kited, those are just the obvious two. Blink also allows Stalkers to have a "new microinteraction" with WMs by dodging their shots.
You're confusing us not seeing that counter-micro because the current meta doesn't encourage it, with the spell fundamentally not having any. The ability has tons of potential. Turtle 20 minutes into Colossus deathblob simply shuts it the fuck down.
Making sure your units continue attacking the damaged Stalker so it can't regenerate shields, making sure your units DON'T continue attacking the damaged Stalker so they don't get kited, those are just the obvious two
Sry, but I think only someone who hasn't played against blink stalkers would recommend target-firing against them.
The issue with target firing is that if the enemy blinks away his stalkers, then your units will follow them blindly for a short while, which bascailly creates an equilibrium where the optimal thing for the enemy to do is to a-move.
This differs from how target firing works vs all other units since they don't instantly move from one place to another. But instead, when they move, they are still vulnerable to target-firing for a short while. This means that the penalty for target-firing against an enemy that "remicro's" isn't as high which actual creates an interaction where targetfiring and repositioning units against target-firing is optimal (unlike the blink-interaction).
Blink also allows Stalkers to have a "new microinteraction" with WMs by dodging their shots.
True, but noone here is talking about the counter-micro possilbiites for the protoss-player. All I am saying that during battles, there is no actual countermicro the enemy can do against it.
On July 24 2014 15:32 Ghanburighan wrote: While we're looking at winrates, here's another Aligulac list:
Just looking at winrates, PvT is rather even, and so is PvZ but TvZ has gone down to the dumps again.
On the other hand, the population numbers are the worst ever for Terran. It looks like T has a constant of around 100 games every period, but with the added number of games (last period has 1799 games, this one 3866), only Z and P seem to have added more mirrors.
So there are 4.8x as many ZvZ as TvT, and 3.8x as many PvP as TvT. This also means that P has once again caught up with Z populations, last period it was 1.3 ZvZ for every 1 PvP, now it's 1.2.
On July 10 2014 20:15 Ghanburighan wrote: Here's the latest Aligulac list (114) with pretty new formatting.
With regard to P, nothing seems to have changed. Just like the first half of June, P>T by a slight margin, P and Z are roughly even, and there are roughly the same number of PvP MU's in tournaments.
Z did worse in this period, while it was at >55% against T last time, it's now even in winrates.
More importantly, looking at populations, while there were 5x more ZvZ than TvT, and 2x more ZvZ than PvP, then now there are only roughly 3x more ZvZ than TvT, and a just over a fourth more ZvZ than PvPs. This suggests that Z is doing worse, and it's mainly doing worse against T (note that worse doesn't imply that they're doing bad, this is a comparison with the previous period).
Looking more closely at the population numbers, there appear to have been fewer games, the total for 114 is 1835 and for 113 it was 2379.
So for the previous 113 list Z MUs made up 72% of all MUs. P MUs made up 55% (note that the overlap is due to the fact that P plays Z...). T MUs made up 36% of all MUs.
In this list, 114, Z MUs made up 65% of all MUs. P MUs made up 57%. T MUs made up 42% of all MUs.
So Z is down 7%, P is up 2% and T is up 6%. (with rounding)
The previous lists can be found below.
On June 29 2014 05:42 Ghanburighan wrote: Sorry for the delay, here's Aligulac 113.. The previous list(s) can be found at the end of this post.
Looking at the winrates, P has extended its advantage over T, P has also gained some ground back against Z, yet TvZ has strongly turned in Z favour once gain (it's as bad as it was before the hellbat patch in April).
Population numbers are also worse. Previously there were 4x more ZvZ games than TvT games, now there are more than 5x. PvP's have not changed in number, so it's mostly just less terrans and more zergs getting further that's creating the problem.
All in all, balance-wise this was a very depressing period.
On June 12 2014 15:32 Ghanburighan wrote: Time to post the latest Aligulac list. The previous list can be found at the end of this post.
Regarding winrates, PvT has fluctuated back from T having a slight advantage to P having a minuscule advantage. In PvZ, P has also improved although it hasn't caught up with Z. On the other hand, T has improved in the TvZ MU (110 had 45%, 111 had 47%) and its even now.
In terms of populations measured in numbers of mirror MUs, there's virtually no change compared to the last list, the proportions are very close. This means that there is no repopulation of terrans according to these numbers and there are 4 times fewer TvTs than ZvZs.
As T MUs have even winrates, there cannot really be a repopulation with these numbers.
Furthermore, a word of caution, I'd say that this was one of the best periods for Terran in a long while, Taeja won Hsc 9 (where Z had a comparatively weaker list of players), Maru is tearing up Code S, and Innovation is kicking as in teamleagues and the Dragon cup. I don't think they contributed overly much to the final winrates (their games are still a small fraction of all the games), but taken together they did contribute significantly. If they don't keep their winning ways going, winrates can plunge below 50% again. And, their wins aren't helping repopulate in any way.
On May 29 2014 02:45 Ghanburighan wrote: Uploading the latest Aligulac list.
Unfortunately there was a TvZ patch in the middle of the period, so those numbers could be anything now.
But it looks like P is doing worse against Z in terms of winrate. But the population ratios haven't changed compared to the last list, though. It's still roughly 1/4 TvT, 2/4 PvP and 1/1 ZvZ.
Hold your horses. 45% for 1-2weeks isnt that bad, given the standards Terrans have taught us in 2013. ;-)
More seriously, Im not against the usage of aligulac (feed me as many stats as possible), yet I've become very careful since that post that revealed that a third (?) of its database are Australian tournaments. It's nice to know that they have a very active community, but it's not the same as looking at Europa or Korea or america alone. Since I have been watching mainly Korean stats, I know that they have very balanced winrates in TvZ. I think in EU it is more Z favored (not just WCs but also e.g. DH). Not sure about America.
Making sure your units continue attacking the damaged Stalker so it can't regenerate shields, making sure your units DON'T continue attacking the damaged Stalker so they don't get kited, those are just the obvious two
Sry, but I think only someone who hasn't played against blink stalkers would recommend target-firing against them.
The issue with target firing is that if the enemy blinks away his stalkers, then your units will follow them blindly for a short while, which bascailly creates an equilibrium where the optimal thing for the enemy to do is to a-move.
This differs from how target firing works vs all other units since they don't instantly move from one place to another. But instead, when they move, they are still vulnerable to target-firing for a short while. This means that the penalty for target-firing against an enemy that "remicro's" isn't as high which actual creates an interaction where targetfiring and repositioning units against target-firing is optimal (unlike the blink-interaction).
So there's a danger of being kited? So... exactly what I said in the second half of the sentence you responded to?
You could counter his retreating Blink by having a couple of flanking Marauders come in from the side to take out the severely wounded Stalkers that try to get away. That's counter-micro. Or if he's not trying to retreat, if he's just trying to maximize damage output by pulling wounded Stalkers out and then ordering them immediately back into the fight, nothing prevents you from selecting a single Marauder in the fight and clicking on that single Stalker. He'll have to have very fast reaction time to prevent the kill.
Do these things happen in the game? Obviously not. Is that a problem with the ability? Not as far as I can see.
Blink also allows Stalkers to have a "new microinteraction" with WMs by dodging their shots.
True, but noone here is talking about the counter-micro possilbiites for the protoss-player. All I am saying that during battles, there is no actual countermicro the enemy can do against it.
When I said that Stim is just like Blink, you responded "Stim creates micro possibilities for Marines to split against Banelings!" If Marine micro possibilities are fair game in defense of Stim, Stalker micro is fair game in defense of Blink.
And if it's not, we're back to Stim not having any counter-micro, either.
You could counter his retreating Blink by having a couple of flanking Marauders come in from the side to take out the severely wounded Stalkers that try to get away. That's counter-micro.
Do these things happen in the game? Obviously not. Is that a problem with the ability? Not as far as I can see.
No it's not counter-micro. Why? Because you have to set this up preemptively. Flanks and anything that happens prior to the battle isn't countermicro. E.g. setting up your Chargelots in front of your army before engaging a bio-ball isn't counter-micro either.
Counter-micro instead occurs when player 1 does a specific action during a battle with one of his units and Player 2 can respond to that efficiently by micro'ing his own units.
Further, the question you must answer here isn't whether it's hyptheotically possible or not to add countermicro to blink, but wheter it's realistic to add in LOTV for instance. I have actually worked alot on trying to make this possible, and my conclusion is that you can't do it. Blink simply provides a way too instantbased form of "micro" that breakes the "rules" of normal RTS-based micro.
You would need some absolutely insane other form of mobility to enemy units in order to add realistic countermicro here.
nothing prevents you from selecting a single Marauder in the fight and clicking on that single Stalker. He'll have to have very fast reaction time to prevent the kill.
This is almost never realistic in an actual game. You said your self you don't play the game, and I would recommend you to be careful about making these types of statements.
When I said that Stim is just like Blink, you responded "Stim creates micro possibilities for Marines to split against Banelings!" If Marine micro possibilities are fair game in defense of Stim, Stalker micro is fair game in defense of Blink.
No becasue stim in it self doens't prevent any type of micro. Blink clearly does as it's often efficient to target-fire Stalkers without blink, but inefficient to target them when they have blink.
You could counter his retreating Blink by having a couple of flanking Marauders come in from the side to take out the severely wounded Stalkers that try to get away. That's counter-micro. Or if he's not trying to retreat, if he's just trying to maximize damage output by pulling wounded Stalkers out and then ordering them immediately back into the fight, nothing prevents you from selecting a single Marauder in the fight and clicking on that single Stalker. He'll have to have very fast reaction time to prevent the kill.
Do these things happen in the game? Obviously not. Is that a problem with the ability? Not as far as I can see.
No it's not counter-micro. Why? Because you have to set this up preemptively. Flanks and anything that happens prior to the battle isn't countermicro. E.g. setting up your Chargelots in front of your army before engaging a bio-ball isn't counter-micro either.
Counter-micro instead occurs when player 1 does a specific action during a battle with one of his units and Player 2 can respond to that efficiently by micro'ing his own units.
Pre-positioning isn't counter-micro, but what if there's no way to pre-position perfectly because the Protoss could Blink away in any number of directions? Then you have to use your flanking bio to intercept the Stalker, that's counter-micro.
I know my hypotheticals are very hypothetical, but you're the one making the bold claim that the ability is fundamentally flawed. All I have to provide is reasonable doubt.
Further, the question you must answer here isn't whether it's hyptheotically possible or not to add countermicro to blink, but wheter it's realistic to add in LOTV for instance. I have actually worked alot on trying to this, but I don't see anyway. Blink simply provides a way too instantbased form of "micro" that breakes the "rules" of normal RTS-based micro.
OK, this is a separate question. It's very simple. Does Blizzard overhaul Protoss with LOTV and turn them into a skill-demanding race? If they do, then anything's possible. If they don't, then it doesn't really matter what we do or don't do with Blink, because for me the game's pretty much fucked anyway. And I expect there are other viewers who'll jump ship, too.
I only tolerate Protoss now because there is hope for significant change. If there's no hope of change, I'll keep watching if Protoss goes back to only having 6-8 players per RO32. Any more than that and I just can't take the competition seriously.
You would need some absolutely insane other form of mobility to enemy units in order to add realistic countermicro here.
Stim+Medivac, creep+fast lings, counter-Blink. I feel that the tools are theoretically there, but I don't see why we couldn't add more.
I know my hypotheticals are very hypothetical, but you're the one making the bold claim that the ability is fundamentally flawed. All I have to provide is reasonable doubt
I don't think I am the only one saying that there isn't really much micro you can do vs blink. I think you will get that from almost every T/Z out there as well.
Notice, however, I didn't say fundamentally flawed. Also, I do acknowledge that many protoss players like this units as it is very micro-intensive. So it's not flawed in every way.
Instead, I proposed a solution to make blink-stalkers more centered around the area where the enemy can respond to it through skills. That's mainly when blink-stalkers are used as pressure/harass-oriented/mutltiask-based unit. In this case, a good terran/zerg can multitask better to defend against the blink stalkers.
Then I suggested to make Stalkers less important during battles/timing attacks and instead increase the Immortals role (plus tweak the Immortal slightly to make it function well as a "core-unit"). The difference betwen the blink-stalker and the Immortal is that all we need to do make the Immortal a unit that can be micro'ed and micro'ed against is through stat-tweaking. Blink-stalkers on the other hand, it's almost impossible to create "practical" counter-micro by just stats-tweaking. You would basically need a totally new game for that to happen.
I guess that's kinda what the Onegoal-mod attempted to do by putting Immortal at WG-tech and Sentry at Robo-tech and then making the Stalker more of a harass-unit. However, I think that's just an unncesary overcomplication as it likely will results in multiple unintended consequences. Rather, I think a more simple solution is to make Robotics Tech cheaper in order to open up for multiple Robotics being used in the midgame. This way, it becomes much easier for the toss to get more Immortals into his composition which (too some extent) can free up the Stalker-role.
Stim+Medivac, creep+fast lings, counter-Blink. I feel that the tools are theoretically there, but I don't see why we couldn't add more.
Not-counter micro. Just very mobile units without any specific interaction related to blink.
I know my hypotheticals are very hypothetical, but you're the one making the bold claim that the ability is fundamentally flawed. All I have to provide is reasonable doubt
I don't think I am the only one saying that there isn't really much micro you can do vs blink. I think you will get that from almost every T/Z out there as well.
Notice, however, I didn't say fundamentally flawed. Also, I do acknowledge that many protoss players like this units as it is very micro-intensive. So it's not flawed in every way.
I see what you're saying, but the truth is Banelings are the only unit that is used differently against Stimmed Marines compared to regular Marines. In every other situation, including all TvPs, Stim just makes Marines better in every way while providing no concrete way for the opponent to counter-micro.
I don't think counter micro as such is absolutely necessary. It's an awesome unexpected bonus (no one saw Marine/Bane interaction coming) but not a requirement. What's important is that micro isn't negated. Stuff like FG and TW are huge offenders.
Instead, I proposed a solution to make blink-stalkers more centered around the area where the enemy can respond to it through skills. That's mainly when blink-stalkers are used as pressure/harass-oriented/mutltiask-based unit. In this case, a good terran/zerg can multitask better to defend against the blink stalkers.
Then I suggested to make Stalkers less important during battles/timing attacks and instead increase the Immortals role (plus tweak the Immortal slightly to make it function well as a "core-unit"). The difference betwen the blink-stalker and the Immortal is that all we need to do make the Immortal a unit that can be micro'ed and micro'ed against is through stat-tweaking. Blink-stalkers on the other hand, it's almost impossible to create "practical" counter-micro by just stats-tweaking. You would basically need a totally new game for that to happen.
I guess that's kinda what the Onegoal-mod attempted to do by putting Immortal at WG-tech and Sentry at Robo-tech and then making the Stalker more of a harass-unit. However, I think that's just an unncesary overcomplication as it likely will results in multiple unintended consequences. Rather, I think a more simple solution is to make Robotics Tech cheaper in order to open up for multiple Robotics being used in the midgame. This way, it becomes much easier for the toss to get more Immortals into his composition which (too some extent) can free up the Stalker-role.
What's your solution to make Blink Stalkers more centered around an area?
The amount of changes Protoss needs is going to cause so many unnecessary complications anyway that nothing should be off the table.
I see what you're saying, but the truth is Banelings are the only unit that is used differently against Stimmed Marines compared to regular Marines. In every other situation, including all TvPs, Stim just makes Marines better in every way while providing no concrete way for the opponent to counter-micro.
Well this isn't related to stim itself though. It's not like there is this interaction which is pretty decent between unstimmed Marines and other units, but get's destroyed when stim is added. At least it seems realistic (with solid design) to create interactions between stimmed bio units and enemy units.
What's your solution to make Blink Stalkers more centered around an area?
I meant that Blink Stalkers would be more used as a form of harassment/pressure/multitaskrelated situations, instead of being an important unit during a straight up comebat.
The amount of changes Protoss needs is going to cause so many unnecessary complications anyway that nothing should be off the table.
Dno. With my suggested approach, the WG-issue is also "fixed" as the defenders advantage is increased when Stalkers become less important and Immortals more important. I am not suggesting as big changes here as other ppl who want to completely redeisgn everything about protoss. Rather, this is what I would do here:
- Small nerf to Stalkers in straight up combat, some kind of (small) mobility compensation - Robo cost reduced to 150/50. - Immortal stats changed to so it fits into gameplay dynamics as a core-unit.
Actually there is counter micro against blink. Watch pro stream, they often move their units ahead to snipe the injuries stalker even before they blink back and focus fire once they blinked. You can see this in zvp more often
On July 26 2014 09:54 ETisME wrote: Actually there is counter micro against blink. Watch pro stream, they often move their units ahead to snipe the injuries stalker even before they blink back and focus fire once they blinked. You can see this in zvp more often
With Hydras, it's still possible in some situations yes. But for that to be possible, unit counts and composition mix needs to be just about right. My point is that this type of micro would still be there if blink didn't exist, and in many situations you cannot micro against blinks (try doing this with Roaches for instance). Blinks in those situations removes the micro that would otherwise exist. So this isn't a counter-micromicro that is added specifically against blink, rather you are just saying that in some situations blink doesn't prevent opponent from microing.
Roach ling as well. You see this kind of micro usually against blink.stalker all in. You bracket a small group of your roach from your big pack and move them forward and focus fire that stalker after it blinked
I don't quite understand your argument, because isn't a stim pretty much similar? How do you counter micro stim except using fungal? How do you out micro magic boxed muta with thors?
On July 26 2014 03:54 Faust852 wrote: And for people saying Z aren't way stronger than T :
On July 24 2014 15:32 Ghanburighan wrote: While we're looking at winrates, here's another Aligulac list:
Just looking at winrates, PvT is rather even, and so is PvZ but TvZ has gone down to the dumps again.
On the other hand, the population numbers are the worst ever for Terran. It looks like T has a constant of around 100 games every period, but with the added number of games (last period has 1799 games, this one 3866), only Z and P seem to have added more mirrors.
So there are 4.8x as many ZvZ as TvT, and 3.8x as many PvP as TvT. This also means that P has once again caught up with Z populations, last period it was 1.3 ZvZ for every 1 PvP, now it's 1.2.
On July 10 2014 20:15 Ghanburighan wrote: Here's the latest Aligulac list (114) with pretty new formatting.
With regard to P, nothing seems to have changed. Just like the first half of June, P>T by a slight margin, P and Z are roughly even, and there are roughly the same number of PvP MU's in tournaments.
Z did worse in this period, while it was at >55% against T last time, it's now even in winrates.
More importantly, looking at populations, while there were 5x more ZvZ than TvT, and 2x more ZvZ than PvP, then now there are only roughly 3x more ZvZ than TvT, and a just over a fourth more ZvZ than PvPs. This suggests that Z is doing worse, and it's mainly doing worse against T (note that worse doesn't imply that they're doing bad, this is a comparison with the previous period).
Looking more closely at the population numbers, there appear to have been fewer games, the total for 114 is 1835 and for 113 it was 2379.
So for the previous 113 list Z MUs made up 72% of all MUs. P MUs made up 55% (note that the overlap is due to the fact that P plays Z...). T MUs made up 36% of all MUs.
In this list, 114, Z MUs made up 65% of all MUs. P MUs made up 57%. T MUs made up 42% of all MUs.
So Z is down 7%, P is up 2% and T is up 6%. (with rounding)
The previous lists can be found below.
On June 29 2014 05:42 Ghanburighan wrote: Sorry for the delay, here's Aligulac 113.. The previous list(s) can be found at the end of this post.
Looking at the winrates, P has extended its advantage over T, P has also gained some ground back against Z, yet TvZ has strongly turned in Z favour once gain (it's as bad as it was before the hellbat patch in April).
Population numbers are also worse. Previously there were 4x more ZvZ games than TvT games, now there are more than 5x. PvP's have not changed in number, so it's mostly just less terrans and more zergs getting further that's creating the problem.
All in all, balance-wise this was a very depressing period.
On June 12 2014 15:32 Ghanburighan wrote: Time to post the latest Aligulac list. The previous list can be found at the end of this post.
Regarding winrates, PvT has fluctuated back from T having a slight advantage to P having a minuscule advantage. In PvZ, P has also improved although it hasn't caught up with Z. On the other hand, T has improved in the TvZ MU (110 had 45%, 111 had 47%) and its even now.
In terms of populations measured in numbers of mirror MUs, there's virtually no change compared to the last list, the proportions are very close. This means that there is no repopulation of terrans according to these numbers and there are 4 times fewer TvTs than ZvZs.
As T MUs have even winrates, there cannot really be a repopulation with these numbers.
Furthermore, a word of caution, I'd say that this was one of the best periods for Terran in a long while, Taeja won Hsc 9 (where Z had a comparatively weaker list of players), Maru is tearing up Code S, and Innovation is kicking as in teamleagues and the Dragon cup. I don't think they contributed overly much to the final winrates (their games are still a small fraction of all the games), but taken together they did contribute significantly. If they don't keep their winning ways going, winrates can plunge below 50% again. And, their wins aren't helping repopulate in any way.
On May 29 2014 02:45 Ghanburighan wrote: Uploading the latest Aligulac list.
Unfortunately there was a TvZ patch in the middle of the period, so those numbers could be anything now.
But it looks like P is doing worse against Z in terms of winrate. But the population ratios haven't changed compared to the last list, though. It's still roughly 1/4 TvT, 2/4 PvP and 1/1 ZvZ.
Hold your horses. 45% for 1-2weeks isnt that bad, given the standards Terrans have taught us in 2013. ;-)
More seriously, Im not against the usage of aligulac (feed me as many stats as possible), yet I've become very careful since that post that revealed that a third (?) of its database are Australian tournaments. It's nice to know that they have a very active community, but it's not the same as looking at Europa or Korea or america alone. Since I have been watching mainly Korean stats, I know that they have very balanced winrates in TvZ. I think in EU it is more Z favored (not just WCs but also e.g. DH). Not sure about America.
There's two points you're neglecting here. First, not every period is contaminated by Aussies, at least it hasn't been showed. The time it was contaminated was also a period with very few games, unlike this one. Secondly, the population numbers need to be taken into account as well. If you look at GSL numbers without population numbers, you're measuring the results of the very best T against all Z. And you know that's not going to give you a reliable picture. The quoted post showed that population numbers are the most skewed ever.
On July 26 2014 03:54 Faust852 wrote: And for people saying Z aren't way stronger than T :
On July 24 2014 15:32 Ghanburighan wrote: While we're looking at winrates, here's another Aligulac list:
Just looking at winrates, PvT is rather even, and so is PvZ but TvZ has gone down to the dumps again.
On the other hand, the population numbers are the worst ever for Terran. It looks like T has a constant of around 100 games every period, but with the added number of games (last period has 1799 games, this one 3866), only Z and P seem to have added more mirrors.
So there are 4.8x as many ZvZ as TvT, and 3.8x as many PvP as TvT. This also means that P has once again caught up with Z populations, last period it was 1.3 ZvZ for every 1 PvP, now it's 1.2.
On July 10 2014 20:15 Ghanburighan wrote: Here's the latest Aligulac list (114) with pretty new formatting.
With regard to P, nothing seems to have changed. Just like the first half of June, P>T by a slight margin, P and Z are roughly even, and there are roughly the same number of PvP MU's in tournaments.
Z did worse in this period, while it was at >55% against T last time, it's now even in winrates.
More importantly, looking at populations, while there were 5x more ZvZ than TvT, and 2x more ZvZ than PvP, then now there are only roughly 3x more ZvZ than TvT, and a just over a fourth more ZvZ than PvPs. This suggests that Z is doing worse, and it's mainly doing worse against T (note that worse doesn't imply that they're doing bad, this is a comparison with the previous period).
Looking more closely at the population numbers, there appear to have been fewer games, the total for 114 is 1835 and for 113 it was 2379.
So for the previous 113 list Z MUs made up 72% of all MUs. P MUs made up 55% (note that the overlap is due to the fact that P plays Z...). T MUs made up 36% of all MUs.
In this list, 114, Z MUs made up 65% of all MUs. P MUs made up 57%. T MUs made up 42% of all MUs.
So Z is down 7%, P is up 2% and T is up 6%. (with rounding)
The previous lists can be found below.
On June 29 2014 05:42 Ghanburighan wrote: Sorry for the delay, here's Aligulac 113.. The previous list(s) can be found at the end of this post.
Looking at the winrates, P has extended its advantage over T, P has also gained some ground back against Z, yet TvZ has strongly turned in Z favour once gain (it's as bad as it was before the hellbat patch in April).
Population numbers are also worse. Previously there were 4x more ZvZ games than TvT games, now there are more than 5x. PvP's have not changed in number, so it's mostly just less terrans and more zergs getting further that's creating the problem.
All in all, balance-wise this was a very depressing period.
On June 12 2014 15:32 Ghanburighan wrote: Time to post the latest Aligulac list. The previous list can be found at the end of this post.
Regarding winrates, PvT has fluctuated back from T having a slight advantage to P having a minuscule advantage. In PvZ, P has also improved although it hasn't caught up with Z. On the other hand, T has improved in the TvZ MU (110 had 45%, 111 had 47%) and its even now.
In terms of populations measured in numbers of mirror MUs, there's virtually no change compared to the last list, the proportions are very close. This means that there is no repopulation of terrans according to these numbers and there are 4 times fewer TvTs than ZvZs.
As T MUs have even winrates, there cannot really be a repopulation with these numbers.
Furthermore, a word of caution, I'd say that this was one of the best periods for Terran in a long while, Taeja won Hsc 9 (where Z had a comparatively weaker list of players), Maru is tearing up Code S, and Innovation is kicking as in teamleagues and the Dragon cup. I don't think they contributed overly much to the final winrates (their games are still a small fraction of all the games), but taken together they did contribute significantly. If they don't keep their winning ways going, winrates can plunge below 50% again. And, their wins aren't helping repopulate in any way.
On May 29 2014 02:45 Ghanburighan wrote: Uploading the latest Aligulac list.
Unfortunately there was a TvZ patch in the middle of the period, so those numbers could be anything now.
But it looks like P is doing worse against Z in terms of winrate. But the population ratios haven't changed compared to the last list, though. It's still roughly 1/4 TvT, 2/4 PvP and 1/1 ZvZ.
Hold your horses. 45% for 1-2weeks isnt that bad, given the standards Terrans have taught us in 2013. ;-)
More seriously, Im not against the usage of aligulac (feed me as many stats as possible), yet I've become very careful since that post that revealed that a third (?) of its database are Australian tournaments. It's nice to know that they have a very active community, but it's not the same as looking at Europa or Korea or america alone. Since I have been watching mainly Korean stats, I know that they have very balanced winrates in TvZ. I think in EU it is more Z favored (not just WCs but also e.g. DH). Not sure about America.
There's two points you're neglecting here. First, not every period is contaminated by Aussies, at least it hasn't been showed. The time it was contaminated was also a period with very few games, unlike this one. Secondly, the population numbers need to be taken into account as well. If you look at GSL numbers without population numbers, you're measuring the results of the very best T against all Z. And you know that's not going to give you a reliable picture. The quoted post showed that population numbers are the most skewed ever.
The thing is that almost every statistics you can get is skewed one way or another. In addition as we have seen people cherry pick "facts" from those stats that support their arguments or use the ever popular: "we can´t count these X players because they are too good" method. Just saying that you can argue over stats forever if you want.
On July 26 2014 03:54 Faust852 wrote: And for people saying Z aren't way stronger than T :
On July 24 2014 15:32 Ghanburighan wrote: While we're looking at winrates, here's another Aligulac list:
Just looking at winrates, PvT is rather even, and so is PvZ but TvZ has gone down to the dumps again.
On the other hand, the population numbers are the worst ever for Terran. It looks like T has a constant of around 100 games every period, but with the added number of games (last period has 1799 games, this one 3866), only Z and P seem to have added more mirrors.
So there are 4.8x as many ZvZ as TvT, and 3.8x as many PvP as TvT. This also means that P has once again caught up with Z populations, last period it was 1.3 ZvZ for every 1 PvP, now it's 1.2.
On July 10 2014 20:15 Ghanburighan wrote: Here's the latest Aligulac list (114) with pretty new formatting.
With regard to P, nothing seems to have changed. Just like the first half of June, P>T by a slight margin, P and Z are roughly even, and there are roughly the same number of PvP MU's in tournaments.
Z did worse in this period, while it was at >55% against T last time, it's now even in winrates.
More importantly, looking at populations, while there were 5x more ZvZ than TvT, and 2x more ZvZ than PvP, then now there are only roughly 3x more ZvZ than TvT, and a just over a fourth more ZvZ than PvPs. This suggests that Z is doing worse, and it's mainly doing worse against T (note that worse doesn't imply that they're doing bad, this is a comparison with the previous period).
Looking more closely at the population numbers, there appear to have been fewer games, the total for 114 is 1835 and for 113 it was 2379.
So for the previous 113 list Z MUs made up 72% of all MUs. P MUs made up 55% (note that the overlap is due to the fact that P plays Z...). T MUs made up 36% of all MUs.
In this list, 114, Z MUs made up 65% of all MUs. P MUs made up 57%. T MUs made up 42% of all MUs.
So Z is down 7%, P is up 2% and T is up 6%. (with rounding)
The previous lists can be found below.
On June 29 2014 05:42 Ghanburighan wrote: Sorry for the delay, here's Aligulac 113.. The previous list(s) can be found at the end of this post.
Looking at the winrates, P has extended its advantage over T, P has also gained some ground back against Z, yet TvZ has strongly turned in Z favour once gain (it's as bad as it was before the hellbat patch in April).
Population numbers are also worse. Previously there were 4x more ZvZ games than TvT games, now there are more than 5x. PvP's have not changed in number, so it's mostly just less terrans and more zergs getting further that's creating the problem.
All in all, balance-wise this was a very depressing period.
On June 12 2014 15:32 Ghanburighan wrote: Time to post the latest Aligulac list. The previous list can be found at the end of this post.
Regarding winrates, PvT has fluctuated back from T having a slight advantage to P having a minuscule advantage. In PvZ, P has also improved although it hasn't caught up with Z. On the other hand, T has improved in the TvZ MU (110 had 45%, 111 had 47%) and its even now.
In terms of populations measured in numbers of mirror MUs, there's virtually no change compared to the last list, the proportions are very close. This means that there is no repopulation of terrans according to these numbers and there are 4 times fewer TvTs than ZvZs.
As T MUs have even winrates, there cannot really be a repopulation with these numbers.
Furthermore, a word of caution, I'd say that this was one of the best periods for Terran in a long while, Taeja won Hsc 9 (where Z had a comparatively weaker list of players), Maru is tearing up Code S, and Innovation is kicking as in teamleagues and the Dragon cup. I don't think they contributed overly much to the final winrates (their games are still a small fraction of all the games), but taken together they did contribute significantly. If they don't keep their winning ways going, winrates can plunge below 50% again. And, their wins aren't helping repopulate in any way.
On May 29 2014 02:45 Ghanburighan wrote: Uploading the latest Aligulac list.
Unfortunately there was a TvZ patch in the middle of the period, so those numbers could be anything now.
But it looks like P is doing worse against Z in terms of winrate. But the population ratios haven't changed compared to the last list, though. It's still roughly 1/4 TvT, 2/4 PvP and 1/1 ZvZ.
Hold your horses. 45% for 1-2weeks isnt that bad, given the standards Terrans have taught us in 2013. ;-)
More seriously, Im not against the usage of aligulac (feed me as many stats as possible), yet I've become very careful since that post that revealed that a third (?) of its database are Australian tournaments. It's nice to know that they have a very active community, but it's not the same as looking at Europa or Korea or america alone. Since I have been watching mainly Korean stats, I know that they have very balanced winrates in TvZ. I think in EU it is more Z favored (not just WCs but also e.g. DH). Not sure about America.
There's two points you're neglecting here. First, not every period is contaminated by Aussies, at least it hasn't been showed. The time it was contaminated was also a period with very few games, unlike this one. Secondly, the population numbers need to be taken into account as well. If you look at GSL numbers without population numbers, you're measuring the results of the very best T against all Z. And you know that's not going to give you a reliable picture. The quoted post showed that population numbers are the most skewed ever.
Well, the population numbers in Code A, Code A Qualifiers and Proleauge werent that bad. Moreover, I have mabually checked a few days of that periode and there were 1-2 such Australian tournaments (ACL, Seacraft) that did have like 20-0-100 stats in terms of mirrors. I dont know if thats all or if there's more Aussi stuff around for said period, but the fact alone that these kinds of tournaments are mixes with Code A etc. makes me more careful with these stats. Same obviously also goes for all the other weekly cups like go4sc2. That's not saying that aligulac is wrong, rather that I wouldnt give too much on the exact numbers. A movement of a percent or a few hundred mirror matches can easily happen without any implications an balance, just based upon wether a certain amateur tournament is being held an recorded or not.
EPT
) and buffing Oracle is a stupid decision agreed across all races, so you are saying that you agree that buffing mine is a little bigger idiocy?![[image loading]](http://www.esreality.com/files/placeimages/2010/79298-Jungle_Basin.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/5/5b/Slag_Pits.jpg/400px-Slag_Pits.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images2/thumb/d/d6/Steppes_of_War.jpg/400px-Steppes_of_War.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/6zp9WrK.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/280eKxW.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Oc9x1bJ.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/pKEYuFe.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/wem39XJ.png)
