EPTSounds like some one just doesn't like it when the situation happens.
It's good to have variety in strategy. Especially in pvp.
A Change to the Oracle - Page 5
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
iamCHOMP
Canada15 Posts
Sounds like some one just doesn't like it when the situation happens. It's good to have variety in strategy. Especially in pvp. | ||
|
Elentos
55553 Posts
On March 14 2016 06:13 Heyjoray wrote: "The other match-ups are not affected" Yeah right, they wont kill Roaches or Lurker. They already burn trough Ravager quite quickly. That change would end even more aggresive options for zerg The change doesn't mean what you seem to think it means. It's not about the oracle's attack, it's about its own unit tags. | ||
|
DonDomingo
504 Posts
On March 14 2016 06:15 Elentos wrote: The change doesn't mean what you seem to think it means. It's not about the oracle's attack, it's about its own unit tags. Hey - let that poor man have his uninformed opinion! Don't pester his life with reason. | ||
|
etofok
138 Posts
| ||
|
Incognoto
France10239 Posts
To me it's the least interesting match up to actually watch. | ||
|
thePunGun
598 Posts
On March 14 2016 06:18 DonDomingo wrote: Hey - let that poor man have his uninformed opinion! Don't pester his life with reason. “Serious affairs and history are carefully laid snares for the uninformed.” Dejan Stojanovic I just love that quote xD | ||
|
G5
United States2906 Posts
On March 14 2016 02:42 NonY wrote: Any vods or replays of the phoenix vs phoenix games that are luck-based? I've played many of them myself recently despite playing NA -> KR latency which is a real challenge for the micro and I never have felt like the game was decided by luck. I'd like to analyze some of the games that these pros felt came down to luck in order to see if I can find a mistake that changed the result of the game. I agree Not sure why so many are saying Phoenix vs Phoenix is luck based. I think it is very skill based, micro intensive, and decision oriented. Starcraft is a game of Risk vs Reward decision making in soooo many scenarios, I don't see where the criticism comes here. | ||
|
Fairwell
Austria195 Posts
On March 14 2016 06:13 iamCHOMP wrote: I honestly don't think the change is necessary. I've never seen any high level games result in phoenix vs phoenix. Sounds like some one just doesn't like it when the situation happens. It's good to have variety in strategy. Especially in pvp. I hardly ever post anything on the forums, but I do read it on a consistent basis. Since you not the first person who brought this up in this thread I would like to elaborate on this. I feel like many people in this thread do not even know what issue Morrow is really talking about (limitation of choices due to the high investment to possibly defend an early oracle without receiving game-end damage in a pvp game) and also what a phoenix war means/is about. The common midgame and lategame is blink-stalker & disruptor heavy with some immortals and 1-2 oracles for spotting (chargelots and dts mostly used for harassment). I watch high level protoss streams basically every day besides playing and I see mass phoenix on a regular basis. I have seen this on Morrow's stream (also when he spent quite some time investigating the correct air unit ratios if the games goes into mass air), but I have seen this quite some times also on other streams (e.g. Naniwa, Bails). This never happens if someone opens stargate while the opponent went for something else (like fast blink instead). This scenario only happens when both players decide to open up with a stargate. Void rays are very situational units. They are used regulary for proxy stargate-one-base allins) and for switching into them after opening phoenix to hold of a fast blink allin. With the exception of those two scenarios void rays are not worth building in pvp at all. In bigger army fights guardian shield in combination with simply blink stalkers will do fine and if supply counts get higher archons/storm will rape them. They are only good in very low eco situations. Mass oracle does not work for hopefully obvious reasons ... which leaves the player opening stargate in pvp with the following reasonable "planned" scenarios: 1. open 1-2 oracle and then let the stargate idle until you might at some point later in the game you want to remake that an oracle for stalker-disruptor wars or you really add something like tempests in late game 2. you intend to open oracle into phoenix 3. you intend to get a bunch of phoenix (3-6 is common) But these plans above are the ones you have in your mind when your oponent would go for some kind of normal NON-STARGATE opening. Once you spot or "think/guess/fear" that your opponent might or is actually going also for a quick stargate, most players will prefer to get phoenix out with perma chronoboost asap. The reason is simple: If you open only phoenix and the opponent goes for anything different from his stargate, you are in the better position. You can catch and kill his oracles quickly without losing anything and then you are not only ahead in ressources but also you gained nearly 2 phoenix in production time advantage which is huge early on. If the opponent does not decide to use his stargate, well then his other tech is delayed and he just wasted all his resources on the building, also fine for you (not very likely, he will only do that if he feels like you will have the upper hand in phoenix count and/or he does not want to fight mass phoenix wars). If the opponent makes void rays, well your gain full map control, scouting, harassment potential and voids perform slightly worse in void vs phooenix battles head on ... why would anyone make them in this scenario. The crucial and annoying thing about phoenix vs phoenix is that they move very quickly but also MOVE-WHILE-SHOOTING. This ability is amazing to run down mutas, banshees etc but it also means that once your phoenix and the ones of your opponent get in range, you can literally not escape unless you are in your own base where you can fly over overcharged pylons/canons etc. This also means that if you have a higher phoenix count, you are super eager to engage because if you can do that, then you will trade in a favourable fashion (e.g. 6 vs 4 phoenix win with like 4 phoenix being alive, hence trading 2 vs 4 of his units and making your lead even bigger). Compare this to muta-vs-muta in zvz which is very different! If you have fewer mutas out you can still fly around and turn around when you see his, they can not shoot-while-moving! So even if you have a lower muta count, you can still use them actively. The second crucial difference is that other early-game protoss units do piteful low dps vs phoenix (stalkers do literally 6.9dps vs a phoenix while a phoenix will deal 19.2 dps to another phoenix). So if you are behind in the phoenix count, you do not really want to make up for it by adding stalkers, if you have 2-3 more phoenix you can still engage your opponent favourably within his base unless he has like 3 stalkers for each phoenix he has less which is obviously a ton early on. Now what happens is that if you already made 2-3 phoenix but then scout/see that your opponent is doing the same ... you kinda do not want to stop making them. If you stop it means not only that you lose all map control, need to invest a lot into stalkers/canons to stop his harassment, but until you can get anything meaningful out to push your opponent (like warp prism + blink) will come very late because you opened with phoenix yourself. And you do not want to use your phoenix against his because they will die so quickly. Regarding the muta-vs-muta zvz example it would work out differently again, because if you have fewer mutas but later in the game you engage with your armies, the other units such as hydras will easily out-dps his mutas for cost, so there is no problem. You would not mind having fewer mutas and other units instead, you "only" lose map control and such early on but the opponent needs to capitalize on it, otherwise his units become very inefficient. Nobody wants his tech building including 2-3 units he just produced to become entirely useless and be put into the situation of not being able to punish it clearly because counter tech/units will take very long after such an opening (which is a very different situation from having blindly opened blink for example, you can easily push with that). The pvp match ends up in a state where more phoenix are always kinda the better tech which continues even with more bases. Some players will try to get HT's for feedback out but all these transitions are too expensive early on. A player who too quickly transitions into something like carriers often times also loses, I have seen so many games (also played quite a lot of them myself since I open stargate a lot ... keep in mind that if you do not open stargate for yourself or always stop after the first oracle, you will never encoutner this situation, this only happens if both went for phoenix as an opening) where you see top gm players massing up phoenix. Good players like Naniwa or Morrow will stack them perfectly so if there is an engagement, all your phoenix will shoot instantly while the ones of the opponent won't, giving you the edge. Is there skill/decision making evolved? Yes, a lot, like stacking the phoenix, timing when you get your range upgrade, when you can finally transition out of it (yes like after 30-40phoenix ...) or once a lot of phoenix died moving single ones back while having a move-while-shooting air battle etc but everyone hates it because it is hard to see the exact phoenix count of your opponent to know if you should engage and even if you are the better player, if you misjudge and you have fewer, you can not escape, you will lose your whole army while he has quite some units left and you end up with tech that is basically unusable for you now. If he has only few phoenix left you can immediately start with tempests or other stuff ... but otherwise you are kinda screwed. People mostly immediately gg out after losing this battle (talking about high gm here, not some gold league). Now the oracle is definitely a very strong opening in PvP in general and some players even like to open stargate to simply have the cool combination of being able to shut down harass nicely (especially fast oracle, unless you have 3 stalkers early in each mineral line you lose way too much and you can always kill it, not just chase it away) and because it is a nice opening in general. Morrow suggests his change with the idea in mind that there are indeed quite some players who would only open stargate if they want to use air units themselves actively and not because they feel like defending potential oracles requires them to have so many units that early at home defensively unless they want to risk receiving game-ending damage early on. However, this change would only solve that but not the annoyance of phoenix wars. Just imagine rock-paper-scissors where you could see what your opponent is doing. Now if you see scissors you should want to make a rock, but in pvp if you see a scissor (phoenix while you also already have phoenix out) is simply another scissor and another one ... maybe a smart guy has a good idea of a potential subtle change that might not affect other matchups and balance. WHAT WOULD THIS CHANGE? A player might not feel the necessity to go phoenix after opening stargate because his oracle would survive much longer against a person opening with phoenix (he will not rely on stalkers defending his base vs oracles but with phoenix, who will now take literally twice the amount of time to kill them), he can still use this oracle to get some damage done until it dies, getting a good amount of investment back because he now has a useless stargate for the next 4-5minutes. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
| ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20301 Posts
They already burn trough Ravager quite quickly Everything burns through ravagers quite quickly. They have less HP and armor than roaches even though they're three times as big. Not a single negative pro opinion? That's not nice for plurality Well it's hard to hate | ||
|
MorroW
Sweden3522 Posts
On March 14 2016 07:05 OtherWorld wrote: Not a single negative pro opinion? That's not nice for plurality i grabbed any protoss i could get (high level tosses) and these were the fastest people to respond. it was just coincidencal that none of the protosses i asked dislike the change. there was no protoss who disliked the idea that i dismissed from the article, that would make it biased and miss leading | ||
|
ZAiNs
United Kingdom6525 Posts
On March 14 2016 06:37 Incognoto wrote: I think I've watched like 3 professional PvPs. To me it's the least interesting match up to actually watch. If you've only watched 3 of them how can you say it's not interesting to watch? 3 is way too small of a sample size. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9396 Posts
On March 14 2016 06:37 Incognoto wrote: I think I've watched like 3 professional PvPs. To me it's the least interesting match up to actually watch. I watched a few basketball games. Now let me comment on how I would like to see rule changes to that game without giving any explanations. | ||
|
thePunGun
598 Posts
On March 14 2016 07:34 ZAiNs wrote: If you've only watched 3 of them how can you say it's not interesting to watch? 3 is way too small of a sample size. I'd say most people only need 1 experience to decide whether they like something or not (for example: kale, ska music, anal, etc.) | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20301 Posts
WCS world championship had 35 zvz's and 7 pvp's. Ting open had 56 zvz's and 0 pvp's. as someone who watches sc2 & plays protoss, i probably know zvz better than my own mirror matchup - what hope is there for somebody who doesn't play protoss to have a good understanding of it? | ||
|
Ve5pa
United Kingdom252 Posts
On March 14 2016 06:37 Incognoto wrote: I think I've watched like 3 professional PvPs. To me it's the least interesting match up to actually watch. Er ZvZ on a dark map, I can barely make anything out. Don't particularly enjoy watching PvP's but if their were more Phoenix wars I probably would to be honest, I think when I have seen it the player with best micro generally wins. I saw one pro who I like very much said 'one missclick can cost you the game'. Well durp, don't missclick, surely that is the point. It's a volatile strat that you opt into and if your opponent does the same it's even more volatile. Lot's of one race games have similar issues with air wars though. Muta vs Muta, or Viking vs Viking, lot's of times it seems to be about massing numbers and not throwing units away, so eventually you just outnumber and crush the opponent by force. | ||
|
Elentos
55553 Posts
On March 14 2016 07:43 thePunGun wrote: I'd say most people only need 1 experience to decide whether they like something or not (for example: kale, ska music, anal, etc.) But every game of Starcraft plays out differently, 1 game is never enough to judge an entire matchup. Imagine someone watched Heart of the Swarm and saw 1 TvZ. And by sheer coincidence it was ended by a roach/bane all-in. From that they concluded the matchup wasn't worth their time and did something else whenever TvZ was on. They formed their opinion on incomplete information and missed all the good stuff. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20301 Posts
Er ZvZ on a dark map, I can barely make anything out. There are several maps in the pool right now that have a pretty big issue with colors due to a bug or a bad setting. They display a narrow range of color like 30-220 instead of 0-255 and it makes everything very washed out and hard to see, especially in dark areas. Dusk Towers is the worst one. That appears to be a flag in the map editor because it plagues a bunch of maps, especially many of the campaign missions but other maps (even in the ladder pool) run the proper color range. I've been saying this for 4 months and nobody seems to care, would appriciate more word @ blizzard about it! | ||
|
Ve5pa
United Kingdom252 Posts
On March 14 2016 07:52 Cyro wrote: There are several maps in the pool right now that have a pretty big issue with colors due to a bug or a bad setting. They display a narrow range of color like 30-220 instead of 0-255 and it makes everything very washed out and hard to see, especially in dark areas. Dusk Towers is the worst one. That appears to be a flag in the map editor because it plagues a bunch of maps, especially many of the campaign missions but other maps (even in the ladder pool) run the proper color range. I've been saying this for 4 months and nobody seems to care, would appriciate more word @ blizzard about it! Well I agree, and i also have an answer 'GLOW-STICKS' for all zerg units in every ZvZ, no matter what the map. I bet Liquid'Snute would agree with these wild changes, he loves his Techno/Trance! | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20301 Posts
| ||
| ||
