|
We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup.
Source
|
On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:Show nested quote +We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net
Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc).
|
On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc).
Curious, do you also think spore +bio damage is a horrible bandaid?
That said, if you're going to give everything +bio vs air, may as well just nerf muta health
|
Erm mutas already have a niche and rare spot in ZvP as it stands. Protoss have gotten just more and more effective ways to deal with them, nerfing them even more in the matchup seems unjustified to me.
Btw I find it hilarious that they think cannon buff is going to help against mass muta switches.... Thats just stupid, even if the P builds 6 cannons at each base 40 mutas roflstomp it, probably not losing a single one unless the cannons are lucky with their shots or the cannons are very close together. That would not effect the matchup much besides making it even more stupid to open muta in zvp and overlord drops would also be easier to defend.
Protoss does not need stronger defense, come on.
|
On April 19 2016 03:50 InfCereal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). Curious, do you also think spore +bio damage is a horrible bandaid?
ofc ("stupidities")
|
On April 19 2016 03:50 Shuffleblade wrote:
Erm mutas already have a niche and rare spot in ZvP as it stands. Protoss have gotten just more and more effective ways to deal with them, nerfing them even more in the matchup seems unjustified to me.
Btw I find it hilarious that they think cannon buff is going to help against mass muta switches.... Thats just stupid, even if the P builds 6 cannons at each base 40 mutas roflstomp it, probably not losing a single one unless the cannons are lucky with their shots or the cannons are very close together. That would not effect the matchup much besides making it even more stupid to open muta in zvp and overlord drops would also be easier to defend.
Protoss does not need stronger defense, come on.
I agree this is definitely not the way to go for the reason you stated : if the Z managed to get a good number of mutas, no cannon buff will help.
An upgrade giving cannons anti air aoe was suggested at some point, it makes slightly more sense but I still think the problem is the mutas, not their counters.
|
WOAH HEY that nerfs Terran drops as well.
|
On April 19 2016 03:54 Incognoto wrote:
WOAH HEY that nerfs Terran drops as well.
no (+ AA bio) -unless you lift the bio units with phoenix into cannon range ha ha ha 
|
I also want to throw in that I am not a fan of muta regeneration (or super high in general).
ATTENTION! THIS IS OVERSIMPLIFIED:
The reason is it takes strategy out of the game. With regular units you have to calculate whether an attack is worth it or not. You are trading muta hitpoints for damage dealt to enemy economy. Muta hitpoints correspond to spent resources and time.
The question always is: Is it worth to kill X workers if I take Y damage?
But with super high regeneration you dont lose anything. Attacking is the default option and there is no thinking process. Every time you are not attacking (other then to regen) you are losing value.
|
I have no idea where this feedback is coming from. PvZ in Proleague, GSL and SSL, mutalisks have not been an issue at all.
|
On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc).
but then again you run into the problem of mutas being even more shit in ZvT where Zerg can be considered having problems (even if just a tiny bit)
this game is made of bandaids at this point
|
On April 19 2016 04:01 RoomOfMush wrote:
I also want to throw in that I am not a fan of muta regeneration (or super high in general).
ATTENTION! THIS IS OVERSIMPLIFIED:
The reason is it takes strategy out of the game. With regular units you have to calculate whether an attack is worth it or not. You are trading muta hitpoints for damage dealt to enemy economy. Muta hitpoints correspond to spent resources and time.
The question always is: Is it worth to kill X workers if I take Y damage?
But with super high regeneration you dont lose anything. Attacking is the default option and there is no thinking process. Every time you are not attacking (other then to regen) you are losing value.
Muta regen is one of the worst ideas ever introduced to the game. It has its place in the pantheon of most harmful concepts ever next to mediboost, oracle speed and warp prism long range pick up. Harass should be risky, at least far more than it is right now.
|
On April 19 2016 04:04 Ej_ wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). but then again you run into the problem of mutas being even more shit in ZvT where Zerg can be considered having problems (even if just a tiny bit) this game is made of bandaids at this point
I have grieved the loss of muta ling bane styles in ZvT and accepted LotV is probably going to be ravager infestor all day long.
|
On April 19 2016 04:04 DonDomingo wrote:
I have no idea where this feedback is coming from. PvZ in Proleague, GSL and SSL, mutalisks have not been an issue at all.
That's exactly what they're addressing. They're not an issue because protoss are forced into stargate openers.
Blizzard wants them to also not be an issue with other openers, so a protoss can do something other than stargate play.
|
On April 19 2016 04:04 DonDomingo wrote:
I have no idea where this feedback is coming from. PvZ in Proleague, GSL and SSL, mutalisks have not been an issue at all.
careful here : ofc mutas haven't been a problem since every P and their brother is opening phoenix right now, precisely to deter the Z from ever wanting to switch into mutas. What Blizz is probably trying to address here is variety.
|
On April 19 2016 04:07 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:04 Ej_ wrote:On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). but then again you run into the problem of mutas being even more shit in ZvT where Zerg can be considered having problems (even if just a tiny bit) this game is made of bandaids at this point I have grieved the loss of muta ling bane styles in ZvT and accepted LotV is probably going to be ravager infestor all day long.
I, and many of the Zergs I play with, only do MLB into ultra. I don't think I know anyone who primarily does roach ravager anymore, and this is high master/gm level zergs.
Of course, we're also in NA, so yeah
|
On April 19 2016 04:10 InfCereal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:07 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 04:04 Ej_ wrote:On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). but then again you run into the problem of mutas being even more shit in ZvT where Zerg can be considered having problems (even if just a tiny bit) this game is made of bandaids at this point I have grieved the loss of muta ling bane styles in ZvT and accepted LotV is probably going to be ravager infestor all day long. I, and many of the Zergs I play with, only do MLB into ultra. I don't think I know anyone who primarily does roach ravager anymore, and this is high master/gm level zergs. Of course, we're also in NA, so yeah
ok
anyway no real point discussing the removal of muta regen, this is their idea and they're far too proud of it to ever think about getting rid of it.
|
Russian Federation54 Posts
not cannons, stalkers pls. but this is right direction - less mutalisk switch power
|
On April 19 2016 04:13 Couguar wrote:
not cannons, stalkers pls. but this is right direction - less mutalisk switch power
but what would the buff to stalkers be ? They already have +armored air damage which is pretty essential in fending off drops vT. Though if their anti air was changed to be +light while still doing its current damage to armored it would be an interesting move -diminishing the strenght of stargate in PvP and allowing to play blink vs mutas.
|
On April 19 2016 04:01 RoomOfMush wrote:
I also want to throw in that I am not a fan of muta regeneration (or super high in general).
ATTENTION! THIS IS OVERSIMPLIFIED:
The reason is it takes strategy out of the game. With regular units you have to calculate whether an attack is worth it or not. You are trading muta hitpoints for damage dealt to enemy economy. Muta hitpoints correspond to spent resources and time.
The question always is: Is it worth to kill X workers if I take Y damage?
But with super high regeneration you dont lose anything. Attacking is the default option and there is no thinking process. Every time you are not attacking (other then to regen) you are losing value.
I'm not sure I agree with you here, cause all in all this whole reasoning could be done with spore crawlers and their buff vs Bio worked very well : it countered the mass Muta vs mass Muta meta and didn't change anything else in the game.
Photo canon buff could do the same.
Moreover, that way Muta keep their power in open battles where they a cool tool for zerg but far from being OP.
On April 19 2016 03:50 Shuffleblade wrote:
Erm mutas already have a niche and rare spot in ZvP as it stands. Protoss have gotten just more and more effective ways to deal with them, nerfing them even more in the matchup seems unjustified to me.
Btw I find it hilarious that they think cannon buff is going to help against mass muta switches.... Thats just stupid, even if the P builds 6 cannons at each base 40 mutas roflstomp it, probably not losing a single one unless the cannons are lucky with their shots or the cannons are very close together. That would not effect the matchup much besides making it even more stupid to open muta in zvp and overlord drops would also be easier to defend.
Protoss does not need stronger defense, come on.
1- show me how they deal with them without massing phoenixes? the whole point of the debate is about allowing Protosses to stop using phoenix in every PvZ, FYI.
2 - that's not true, just look how spore crawler buff changed ZvZ.
|
On April 19 2016 04:20 Gwavajuice wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:01 RoomOfMush wrote:
I also want to throw in that I am not a fan of muta regeneration (or super high in general).
ATTENTION! THIS IS OVERSIMPLIFIED:
The reason is it takes strategy out of the game. With regular units you have to calculate whether an attack is worth it or not. You are trading muta hitpoints for damage dealt to enemy economy. Muta hitpoints correspond to spent resources and time.
The question always is: Is it worth to kill X workers if I take Y damage?
But with super high regeneration you dont lose anything. Attacking is the default option and there is no thinking process. Every time you are not attacking (other then to regen) you are losing value. I'm not sure I agree with you here, cause all in all this whole reasoning could be done with spore crawlers and their buff vs Bio worked very well : it countered the mass Muta vs mass Muta meta and didn't change anything else in the game. Photo canon buff could do the same.
But thats not damage. Damage done to mutas is worthless because of the regen. You have to kill them because if not you are doing no damage at all.
Its an all or nothing situation. You either kill them or you dont even deal any damage to them at all. Its the same thing that happened to SC2 all over the place: All-Or-Nothing, All-Or-Nothing, All-Or-Nothing, All-Or-Nothing...
|
On April 19 2016 04:20 Gwavajuice wrote:
2 - that's not true, just look how spore crawler buff changed ZvZ.
This, 1000x this. You guys mistake the goal here, the same problem so many have with the widow mine. This change would NOT be to have cannons always kill all the muta's. Its to slow the muta player down so that his opponent can respond. Better cannons means the muta player either has to mass muta's before fighting, which gives time for the protoss to tech to pheonix, or it gives a solid defenders advantage to the blink stalkers/templar/etc.
|
On April 19 2016 04:29 Draddition wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:20 Gwavajuice wrote:
2 - that's not true, just look how spore crawler buff changed ZvZ.
This, 1000x this. You guys mistake the goal here, the same problem so many have with the widow mine. This change would NOT be to have cannons always kill all the muta's. Its to slow the muta player down so that his opponent can respond. Better cannons means the muta player either has to mass muta's before fighting, which gives time for the protoss to tech to pheonix, or it gives a solid defenders advantage to the blink stalkers/templar/etc.
I fear the end result would be that :
1- P will still play the same style all over again, with or without phoenix (even if I didn't fear muta switches I would open phoenix every game because of the harass possibilities and the scouting opportunities) ;
2- no PvZ will ever see a muta again.
So overall I don't think this is a sensible change -you even lose some variety in the end, even if muta switches are already pretty rare- if you don't combine it with changes to immortals for instance.
|
Okay, so realistically, why would you not still go double stargate phoenix every game? Does buffing cannons against mutas actually change the fact that opening phoenix is the most safe thing a Protoss can do against Zerg without sacrificing too much economy? Does it change how good phoenixes are? All it does is make mutas a dead unit in the matchup.
|
I am in utter disbelief. The zergs complain that they can't win in the late game, and we get rid of the possibility to base race with op cannons, as if recall wasn't enough ???
|
Wait... Mutas are a problem in PvZ? Since when? Must be at the highest level.. oh wait there aren't any zergs left in GSL because they all got roflstomped. Should have used Mutas tsk tsk. But no seriously, is photon overcharge, recall, blink, storm, and phoenix range not enough? How behind are you that Zerg can just drop that many mutas on you like that?
|
On April 19 2016 04:37 Elentos wrote:
Okay, so realistically, why would you not still go double stargate phoenix every game? Does buffing cannons against mutas actually change the fact that opening phoenix is the most safe thing a Protoss can do against Zerg without sacrificing too much economy? Does it change how good phoenixes are? All it does is make mutas a dead unit in the matchup.
yeah makes no sense to me either.
|
Rofl this is the worst solution ever. Static defense in sc2 is so ridiculously strong, it encourages low skill turtle, low apm play, and there's no swarm or anything to nullify them (well vipers, but it's just not convenient)...
What's wrong with going phoenixes? They're great, mobile units which require some sort of skill to use. You had to go 'sairs in PvZ to avoid being steamrolled by mutas in BW, seems to me it's the same principle, carried over from the greatest RTS of all time.
I don't see the issue of going phoenix tbh
|
On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc).
lol what? You remove Muta regen Mutalisks are going to suck in all match ups. I also don't think it's a "horrible" bandaid solution. Although I think Stalkers should get an AA buff instead of cannons.
|
On April 19 2016 04:50 crbox wrote:
Rofl this is the worst solution ever. Static defense in sc2 is so ridiculously strong, it encourages low skill turtle, low apm play, and there's no swarm or anything to nullify them (well vipers, but it's just not convenient)...
What's wrong with going phoenixes? They're great, mobile units which require some sort of skill to use. You had to go 'sairs in PvZ to avoid being steamrolled by mutas in BW, seems to me it's the same principle, carried over from the greatest RTS of all time.
I don't see the issue of going phoenix tbh
Protoss has turned to going phoenix into double robo chargelot/immortal every single game against Zerg, which is boring to play, play against and watch.
On April 19 2016 04:52 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). lol what? You remove Muta regen Mutalisks are going to suck in all match ups. I also don't think it's a "horrible" bandaid solution. Although I think Stalkers should get an AA buff instead of cannons.
It's pretty horrible because it doesn't give Protoss an actual reason to open with something other than phoenixes. It misses the point of what they want to do and doesn't really improve the matchup as it is right now.
|
On April 19 2016 04:50 crbox wrote:
Rofl this is the worst solution ever. Static defense in sc2 is so ridiculously strong, it encourages low skill turtle, low apm play, and there's no swarm or anything to nullify them (well vipers, but it's just not convenient)...
What's wrong with going phoenixes? They're great, mobile units which require some sort of skill to use. You had to go 'sairs in PvZ to avoid being steamrolled by mutas in BW, seems to me it's the same principle, carried over from the greatest RTS of all time.
I don't see the issue of going phoenix tbh
I think they didn't understand the feedback about variety right. I'm pretty sure most people are ok with most P players opening phoenix -that was the case in early HotS and everyone was happy with it. The thing people are not ok with is -correct me if I'm wrong- seeing P players go double robo chargelot archon immortal out of it every game and winning if the Z doesn't manage to somehow get brood lords. If anything give Z tools to fight that composition, but the proposed change really seems irrelevant to me and serves no purpose other than definitely killing mutas in PvZ.
|
On April 19 2016 04:50 crbox wrote:
Rofl this is the worst solution ever. Static defense in sc2 is so ridiculously strong, it encourages low skill turtle, low apm play, and there's no swarm or anything to nullify them (well vipers, but it's just not convenient)...
What's wrong with going phoenixes? They're great, mobile units which require some sort of skill to use. You had to go 'sairs in PvZ to avoid being steamrolled by mutas in BW, seems to me it's the same principle, carried over from the greatest RTS of all time.
I don't see the issue of going phoenix tbh
Static defense was much much stronger in BW and it did NOT encourage turtling or low APM play. Static defense being strong has nothing to do with that. Its just the way SC2 is designed.
|
I don't see how this will stop Protoss from opening stargate into pheonix. Afterall, they can scout, harrass, defend against early roach ravager pushes, support fights and lift lurkers. We no longer see muta switches anymore unless the Zerg is so far ahead he can just remax on anything. Having the infrastructure to defend against muta or broodlord switch is just the icing on the cake. This buff only makes sense if blizzard is planning to nerf the pheonix or some other protoss unit or ability.
|
On April 19 2016 04:52 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). lol what? You remove Muta regen Mutalisks are going to suck in all match ups. I also don't think it's a "horrible" bandaid solution. Although I think Stalkers should get an AA buff instead of cannons.
mutas were 100% fine in WoL and all the things that make you say that mutas would suck in all mus if muta regen was removed were introduced because of muta regen.
The only part I agree with is stalkers should get the buff instead of cannons, stalkers are already pretty rare in the mu nowadays (keep the anti ground as it is and make the anti air 14 + something vs light so that the stalker is still as effective vs drops or void rays).
|
On April 19 2016 04:52 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:50 crbox wrote:
Rofl this is the worst solution ever. Static defense in sc2 is so ridiculously strong, it encourages low skill turtle, low apm play, and there's no swarm or anything to nullify them (well vipers, but it's just not convenient)...
What's wrong with going phoenixes? They're great, mobile units which require some sort of skill to use. You had to go 'sairs in PvZ to avoid being steamrolled by mutas in BW, seems to me it's the same principle, carried over from the greatest RTS of all time.
I don't see the issue of going phoenix tbh Protoss has turned to going phoenix into double robo chargelot/immortal every single game against Zerg, which is boring to play, play against and watch.
But would you agree that the problematic part is the "into", not the actual phoenix openers ? If P opened phoenix every game but had a variety of viable transitions I'm pretty sure no one would be complaining.
|
It sounds like to me that the trouble is that protoss has a single very effective build that defends everything pass the cheesy point of the game and deals enough harrass damage, transitioning into winning the game. Kinda like WoL Infester broodlord period ZvT.
|
On April 19 2016 04:59 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:52 Elentos wrote:On April 19 2016 04:50 crbox wrote:
Rofl this is the worst solution ever. Static defense in sc2 is so ridiculously strong, it encourages low skill turtle, low apm play, and there's no swarm or anything to nullify them (well vipers, but it's just not convenient)...
What's wrong with going phoenixes? They're great, mobile units which require some sort of skill to use. You had to go 'sairs in PvZ to avoid being steamrolled by mutas in BW, seems to me it's the same principle, carried over from the greatest RTS of all time.
I don't see the issue of going phoenix tbh Protoss has turned to going phoenix into double robo chargelot/immortal every single game against Zerg, which is boring to play, play against and watch. But would you agree that the problematic part is the "into", not the actual phoenix openers ? If P opened phoenix every game but had a variety of viable transitions I'm pretty sure no one would be complaining.
I think it would help if there was an alternative if you want to go into macro play. I guess variety for the followup would help a good deal already.
I'm not terrbily optimistic about the state of Zerg in ZvP lategame though, if Protoss gets more options that could get problematic.
|
On April 19 2016 05:04 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:59 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 04:52 Elentos wrote:On April 19 2016 04:50 crbox wrote:
Rofl this is the worst solution ever. Static defense in sc2 is so ridiculously strong, it encourages low skill turtle, low apm play, and there's no swarm or anything to nullify them (well vipers, but it's just not convenient)...
What's wrong with going phoenixes? They're great, mobile units which require some sort of skill to use. You had to go 'sairs in PvZ to avoid being steamrolled by mutas in BW, seems to me it's the same principle, carried over from the greatest RTS of all time.
I don't see the issue of going phoenix tbh Protoss has turned to going phoenix into double robo chargelot/immortal every single game against Zerg, which is boring to play, play against and watch. But would you agree that the problematic part is the "into", not the actual phoenix openers ? If P opened phoenix every game but had a variety of viable transitions I'm pretty sure no one would be complaining. I think it would help if there was an alternative if you want to go into macro play. I guess variety for the followup would help a good deal already. I'm not terrbily optimistic about the state of Zerg in ZvP lategame though, if Protoss gets more options that could get problematic.
What I fail to understand is that even if mutas were nerfed to the ground, it doesn't change the fact that opening phoenix is very safe, all-around and strong. So I'm unsure this move will really change the situation. As I said before I would still go phoenix every game even if mutas didn't exist.
|
On April 19 2016 03:54 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:54 Incognoto wrote:
WOAH HEY that nerfs Terran drops as well. no (+ AA bio) -unless you lift the bio units with phoenix into cannon range ha ha ha
oh AA!!
anti-air!!
lol ok i misunderstood
this is like the definition of a useless bandaid. :/
|
On April 19 2016 05:15 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 05:04 Elentos wrote:On April 19 2016 04:59 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 04:52 Elentos wrote:On April 19 2016 04:50 crbox wrote:
Rofl this is the worst solution ever. Static defense in sc2 is so ridiculously strong, it encourages low skill turtle, low apm play, and there's no swarm or anything to nullify them (well vipers, but it's just not convenient)...
What's wrong with going phoenixes? They're great, mobile units which require some sort of skill to use. You had to go 'sairs in PvZ to avoid being steamrolled by mutas in BW, seems to me it's the same principle, carried over from the greatest RTS of all time.
I don't see the issue of going phoenix tbh Protoss has turned to going phoenix into double robo chargelot/immortal every single game against Zerg, which is boring to play, play against and watch. But would you agree that the problematic part is the "into", not the actual phoenix openers ? If P opened phoenix every game but had a variety of viable transitions I'm pretty sure no one would be complaining. I think it would help if there was an alternative if you want to go into macro play. I guess variety for the followup would help a good deal already. I'm not terrbily optimistic about the state of Zerg in ZvP lategame though, if Protoss gets more options that could get problematic. What I fail to understand is that even if mutas were nerfed to the ground, it doesn't change the fact that opening phoenix is very safe, all-around and strong. So I'm unsure this move will really change the situation. As I said before I would still go phoenix every game even if mutas didn't exist.
I'm in the same boat. I mean, I don't main Protoss so my firsthand experience is shaky at best, but from that and the pro games I watched, I don't really see why you wouldn't go phoenix if you want to play a macro game.
|
wow thats awesome, I can lift Zerg units for extra damage near cannons. Even more reason to go Phoenix !
|
nope mutalisks are only good when you get over 20 of them but who the fuck lets people get that much gas anyway
|
On April 19 2016 05:47 FeyFey wrote:
wow thats awesome, I can lift Zerg units for extra damage near cannons. Even more reason to go Phoenix !
ha ha ha that's actually a good point
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On April 19 2016 05:47 FeyFey wrote:
wow thats awesome, I can lift Zerg units for extra damage near cannons. Even more reason to go Phoenix !
Imagine the drop defense in PvZ, ovies die super fast and what survive will be lifted into cannons! 
|
On a more serious note this move would actually remove some potential of the bane drop style, and this point would genuinely concern me.
|
On April 19 2016 05:50 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 05:47 FeyFey wrote:
wow thats awesome, I can lift Zerg units for extra damage near cannons. Even more reason to go Phoenix ! Imagine the drop defense in PvZ, ovies die super fast and what survive will be lifted into cannons!
I mean, really, this is an improvement in every matchup. Marines? Bio. Marauders? Bio. Zealots? Bio. Adepts? Bio. DTs? Bio. Phoenix/cannon new meta
Now all that's left is to make the Artosis prophecy come true and give phoenixes the ability to help each other lift heavier things. 20 phoenixes can fly away with a hatchery.
|
Or... They could just buff Stalker anti-air damage.
|
Honestly I don't think this will solve the problem at all. In fact I don't think mutas are even the whole problem. There is absolutely no reason for a protoss to not open stargate. The units are just too good. Did the zerg open mutas? You're ahead now. Are they roach/ravager all inning? Lift the units as they come and defend with pylons.
The issue isn't that mutas are a problem, its that stargate is blatantly the better option for the protoss because mutas CAN BE the problem
|
On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc).
Personally, I don't think they can get rid of muta regen because of the potential for things like WMs and Turrets to simply be too effective.
A nerf to 0.8 hp / HotS second (from the current 1.0) or even 0.6 or 0.7 would vastly improve the effective damage taken by mutalisks from AoE (and even normal) attacks ... which would vastly open upon counter-options in PvZ especially.
I dislike the change to cannons because it's yet another soft-counter to a problem-matic ability (insane muta-regen).
And yet, it would, I feel, open up PvZ. Because, just like in HotS and WoL, having more units is generally better than having a very few phoenix with limited energy versus all-ins or pressure builds.
While, yes, Phoenix openers would still exist and, due to the current meta, probably be prevalent for a while ... other things could be safe, and thus Protoss players would use them if for nothing else than the surprise factor and, thus, increased chance to win versus an opponent.
I mean, Protoss used to open soul-train versus zergs all the time. That'd be a hell of a build in LotV versus bane-rain builds, with well-spread sentries and good placement of forcefields.
A mass of stalkers to force even more speedlings, and investment (not just larva, but also actual gas) into defenses early could be a solid transition to a mid-game.
Everything that you'd normally be getting ground forces with (and thus forges for upgrades) would naturally be slightly buffed in the early-game with a change to cannons.
I dislike the buff from a design standpoint. From a early-game build-variety standpoint, I think it could definitely work.
|
On April 19 2016 04:56 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:52 blade55555 wrote:On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). lol what? You remove Muta regen Mutalisks are going to suck in all match ups. I also don't think it's a "horrible" bandaid solution. Although I think Stalkers should get an AA buff instead of cannons. mutas were 100% fine in WoL and all the things that make you say that mutas would suck in all mus if muta regen was removed were introduced because of muta regen. The only part I agree with is stalkers should get the buff instead of cannons, stalkers are already pretty rare in the mu nowadays (keep the anti ground as it is and make the anti air 14 + something vs light so that the stalker is still as effective vs drops or void rays).
ALL Protoss units regen their shield twice faster than mutalisk !
Medivac heals bio 9 times faster than mutalisk ! And VCS can repair any mecanical units faster than mutas regen !
It's just anti-Zerg bias claming mutas regen is OP, but medivac/shield regen are fine...
P/T have massive anti-air AOE with WM, Thor, liberators, storm, archons, while Mutas are much more expensive than this units !
3 mutas more expensive than a thor, 2 mutas more than one liberator or a HT.
But you want 1 shot of thor/liberator or a storm will make useless a 10-20 mutas than cost 1000/1000-2000/2000 !
It's just pure whine and anti-Zerg bias rather than a serious demand.
|
On April 19 2016 05:56 Edowyth wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). Personally, I don't think they can get rid of muta regen because of the potential for things like WMs and Turrets to simply be too effective. A nerf to 0.8 hp / HotS second (from the current 1.0) or even 0.6 or 0.7 would vastly improve the effective damage taken by mutalisks from AoE (and even normal) attacks ... which would vastly open upon counter-options in PvZ especially. I dislike the change to cannons because it's yet another soft-counter to a problem-matic ability (insane muta-regen). And yet, it would, I feel, open up PvZ. Because, just like in HotS and WoL, having more units is generally better than having a very few phoenix with limited energy versus all-ins or pressure builds. While, yes, Phoenix openers would still exist and, due to the current meta, probably be prevalent for a while ... other things could be safe, and thus Protoss players would use them if for nothing else than the surprise factor and, thus, increased chance to win versus an opponent. I mean, Protoss used to open soul-train versus zergs all the time. That'd be a hell of a build in LotV versus bane-rain builds, with well-spread sentries and good placement of forcefields. A mass of stalkers to force even more speedlings, and investment (not just larva, but also actual gas) into defenses early could be a solid transition to a mid-game. Everything that you'd normally be getting ground forces with (and thus forges for upgrades) would naturally be slightly buffed in the early-game with a change to cannons. I dislike the buff from a design standpoint. From a early-game build-variety standpoint, I think it could definitely work.
The reason Protoss players open phoenixes isn't the pure safety though. There are safer openers. You're not prohibited from opening with 3 gates and a safety robo. But phoenixes are the safest economic opening. Making cannons "better" won't change that.
|
On April 19 2016 03:53 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:50 Shuffleblade wrote:
Erm mutas already have a niche and rare spot in ZvP as it stands. Protoss have gotten just more and more effective ways to deal with them, nerfing them even more in the matchup seems unjustified to me.
Btw I find it hilarious that they think cannon buff is going to help against mass muta switches.... Thats just stupid, even if the P builds 6 cannons at each base 40 mutas roflstomp it, probably not losing a single one unless the cannons are lucky with their shots or the cannons are very close together. That would not effect the matchup much besides making it even more stupid to open muta in zvp and overlord drops would also be easier to defend.
Protoss does not need stronger defense, come on. I agree this is definitely not the way to go for the reason you stated : if the Z managed to get a good number of mutas, no cannon buff will help. An upgrade giving cannons anti air aoe was suggested at some point, it makes slightly more sense but I still think the problem is the mutas, not their counters.
.4 collision radius to only hit Marines and Zerglings (in addition to Mutalisks) would help quite a lot for that purpose. Set it instead of .35 radius to only effect Mutalisks, but I rather like the idea of Photon Cannons being more effective in defending against swarms of early game units. Unfortunately, that might cause an issue with workers. An alternative solution would be to set the radius to .380 and increase the radius of workers to .385. Extremely subtle changes, except in the very specific cases of interacting with Photon Cannons.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On April 19 2016 05:53 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 05:50 deacon.frost wrote:On April 19 2016 05:47 FeyFey wrote:
wow thats awesome, I can lift Zerg units for extra damage near cannons. Even more reason to go Phoenix ! Imagine the drop defense in PvZ, ovies die super fast and what survive will be lifted into cannons! I mean, really, this is an improvement in every matchup. Marines? Bio. Marauders? Bio. Zealots? Bio. Adepts? Bio. DTs? Bio. Phoenix/cannon new meta Now all that's left is to make the Artosis prophecy come true and give phoenixes the ability to help each other lift heavier things. 20 phoenixes can fly away with a hatchery.
I always dream about picking up a viking  I know it's not bio, but damn, it's liking picking up vikings into medevacs(looking at you, Maru).
|
Sigh, yet another bandaid in SC2.
|
I feel like I am missing something, since Protoss has such good hard counters to Mutalisks already that they are only possible if you won the game five minutes ago and transition 20 at a time.
|
Protoss doesn't go Stargate because of Mutalisks but because it can beat almost every allin.
Also not every Protoss goes Stargate.
Gm Zerg here...
|
Not really a smart change for the following reasons:
1) Nerfs overlord drops much harder than vs muta play
2) If buffed to the point of spore crawlers, negates muta play entirely
3) If not buffed to the point of spore crawlers, most high level players will manuver around so only 1 cannon shoots at the flock at a time. It just takes a tad more micro to attack a mineral line then.
Lastly, I get that its good to introduce variety. Right now protoss players open stargate to deny muta switches from happening, and also to harass and scout zerg while taking their 3rd.
Even if cannons got a buff (so muta switches are less strong), are there even better alternatives to opening stargate? You have to provide a more viable/interesting/fun option than stargate. If the protoss players cut stargate and go straight into robo/twilight, they lose the ability to harass and scout as easily. Maintaining the phoenix count is also important for later lurker engagements and to snipe vipers (if the player can keep the phoenix alive till hive).
I predict even with the cannon buff, protoss players will still go pheonix.
|
On April 19 2016 04:33 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:29 Draddition wrote:On April 19 2016 04:20 Gwavajuice wrote:
2 - that's not true, just look how spore crawler buff changed ZvZ.
This, 1000x this. You guys mistake the goal here, the same problem so many have with the widow mine. This change would NOT be to have cannons always kill all the muta's. Its to slow the muta player down so that his opponent can respond. Better cannons means the muta player either has to mass muta's before fighting, which gives time for the protoss to tech to pheonix, or it gives a solid defenders advantage to the blink stalkers/templar/etc. I fear the end result would be that : 1- P will still play the same style all over again, with or without phoenix (even if I didn't fear muta switches I would open phoenix every game because of the harass possibilities and the scouting opportunities) ; 2- no PvZ will ever see a muta again. So overall I don't think this is a sensible change -you even lose some variety in the end, even if muta switches are already pretty rare- if you don't combine it with changes to immortals for instance.
That's certainly a potential outcome. I severely hope Blizzard doesn't assume this solves everything, but instead opens up possibilities to nerf/buff units on both sides, so we can reach a good point in the match up. Hopefully, this is only stage one.
|
On April 19 2016 06:36 Draddition wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:33 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 04:29 Draddition wrote:On April 19 2016 04:20 Gwavajuice wrote:
2 - that's not true, just look how spore crawler buff changed ZvZ.
This, 1000x this. You guys mistake the goal here, the same problem so many have with the widow mine. This change would NOT be to have cannons always kill all the muta's. Its to slow the muta player down so that his opponent can respond. Better cannons means the muta player either has to mass muta's before fighting, which gives time for the protoss to tech to pheonix, or it gives a solid defenders advantage to the blink stalkers/templar/etc. I fear the end result would be that : 1- P will still play the same style all over again, with or without phoenix (even if I didn't fear muta switches I would open phoenix every game because of the harass possibilities and the scouting opportunities) ; 2- no PvZ will ever see a muta again. So overall I don't think this is a sensible change -you even lose some variety in the end, even if muta switches are already pretty rare- if you don't combine it with changes to immortals for instance. That's certainly a potential outcome. I severely hope Blizzard doesn't assume this solves everything, but instead opens up possibilities to nerf/buff units on both sides, so we can reach a good point in the match up. Hopefully, this is only stage one.
I hope they can come up with something else to be frank, really feels like yet another bandaid and I don't see how it improves the mu.
|
incoming cannon-push-build-plus-phoenix-in-close-positions build added to the toss playbook by sOs
|
Cool... make cannon rushes against terran even stronger
|
On April 19 2016 06:49 Hurricaned wrote:
Cool... make cannon rushes against terran even stronger
What terran units are both bio and fly, pray tell?
|
On April 19 2016 06:51 InfCereal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 06:49 Hurricaned wrote:
Cool... make cannon rushes against terran even stronger What terran units are both bio and fly, pray tell?
Reapers while cliff-jumping. :D
|
On April 19 2016 06:45 necrosexy wrote:
incoming cannon-push-build-plus-phoenix-in-close-positions build added to the toss playbook by sOs :D
|
On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc).
Have to agree with this one. Mutalisks didn´t need more speed or regeneration and only made this Unit stupid and more annoying as it already is. Running back and forth between point A and B just to catch Units is not fun its frustating. But they did this with a couple of other Units that were actually good as they were which didn´t need it like Oracles and Medivacs (Altough Aenion Crystals was before HotS).
Stop this bandaiding.
|
On April 19 2016 03:54 Incognoto wrote:
WOAH HEY that nerfs Terran drops as well.
what? what unit is terran bio air?
|
On April 19 2016 05:15 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 05:04 Elentos wrote:On April 19 2016 04:59 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 04:52 Elentos wrote:On April 19 2016 04:50 crbox wrote:
Rofl this is the worst solution ever. Static defense in sc2 is so ridiculously strong, it encourages low skill turtle, low apm play, and there's no swarm or anything to nullify them (well vipers, but it's just not convenient)...
What's wrong with going phoenixes? They're great, mobile units which require some sort of skill to use. You had to go 'sairs in PvZ to avoid being steamrolled by mutas in BW, seems to me it's the same principle, carried over from the greatest RTS of all time.
I don't see the issue of going phoenix tbh Protoss has turned to going phoenix into double robo chargelot/immortal every single game against Zerg, which is boring to play, play against and watch. But would you agree that the problematic part is the "into", not the actual phoenix openers ? If P opened phoenix every game but had a variety of viable transitions I'm pretty sure no one would be complaining. I think it would help if there was an alternative if you want to go into macro play. I guess variety for the followup would help a good deal already. I'm not terrbily optimistic about the state of Zerg in ZvP lategame though, if Protoss gets more options that could get problematic. What I fail to understand is that even if mutas were nerfed to the ground, it doesn't change the fact that opening phoenix is very safe, all-around and strong. So I'm unsure this move will really change the situation. As I said before I would still go phoenix every game even if mutas didn't exist.
"What I fail to understand is that even if mutas were nerfed to the ground, it doesn't change the fact that opening phoenix is very safe, all-around and strong." Correlation does not imply causation.
You fail to understand why mutas being nerfed into the ground will be a good thing.. then why are you blindly advocating it so much. Can you plz go over the details of how it would be better and how it'll affect every matchup for zerg and not just PVZ. Seeing you're only talking PVZ throughout like 10 comments.
|
I think phoenix is just too strong against mutalisks, and maybe it would be a good idea to nerf them a bit, most importantly reduce their speed to be slower than mutas (5.95->5.3?) and maybe reduce their bonus to light (+5->+4?), and in exchange give Protoss better tools to defend against them, maybe give +1 AA range to stalkers, which would help quite a bit against BLs as well. I don't think they will ever remove PO, so that ability might gain some AOE against air as well.
|
Are there actually Protoss players who would not want to open Phoenixes?
Rewards good mechanics
Allows good scouting lessing randomness
What's not to like?
|
On April 19 2016 08:06 DonDomingo wrote:
Are there actually Protoss players who would not want to open Phoenixes?
Rewards good mechanics
Allows good scouting lessing randomness
What's not to like?
Apparently there are some
|
(anyways, I don't really think their "smallest possible change" philosophy is that good, because this way they can hill climb into a local maximum instead of a possibly better global maximum, trying to find the best gaming experience there can be, if there's such thing, and if that's what they are after.)
|
I would like to hear the reasoning tbh. Do your twitter job and annoy HuK a little more
|
Oh, sorry for not specifying, I meant actual players, not foreigners :D
|
On April 19 2016 08:09 The_Red_Viper wrote:I would like to hear the reasoning tbh. Do your twitter job and annoy HuK a little more
This is the best reason I could find.
|
On April 19 2016 08:09 DonDomingo wrote:Oh, sorry for not specifying, I meant actual players, not foreigners :D
Everybody's word is important, that's why you are allowed to give your opinions
I think it safe to say that most Protoss players complain about this, whatever their country or their level, simply because having only one option, even if it's a strong one, is not good in the long run.
To have a healthy meta, we need variety of strats, that's why phoenix into PICA in every PvZ game is bad and tankivacs marine mirror in every TvT is bad too.
(To be fair, we had Dear doing disruptor drop openings vs Losira, but he always ended up with PICA in mid/late game)
edit : typos
|
|
|
On April 19 2016 08:08 bela.mervado wrote:
(anyways, I don't really think their "smallest possible change" philosophy is that good, because this way they can hill climb into a local maximum instead of a possibly better global maximum, trying to find the best gaming experience there can be, if there's such thing, and if that's what they are after.)
I've played online for almost 20 years, and the "smallest possible change" is never bad. When patch teams swing their nerf/buff hammers like blind drunken dwarf berseks, they do more bad than good most of the time.
|
On April 19 2016 07:51 ArgusDreamer wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 05:15 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 05:04 Elentos wrote:On April 19 2016 04:59 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 04:52 Elentos wrote:On April 19 2016 04:50 crbox wrote:
Rofl this is the worst solution ever. Static defense in sc2 is so ridiculously strong, it encourages low skill turtle, low apm play, and there's no swarm or anything to nullify them (well vipers, but it's just not convenient)...
What's wrong with going phoenixes? They're great, mobile units which require some sort of skill to use. You had to go 'sairs in PvZ to avoid being steamrolled by mutas in BW, seems to me it's the same principle, carried over from the greatest RTS of all time.
I don't see the issue of going phoenix tbh Protoss has turned to going phoenix into double robo chargelot/immortal every single game against Zerg, which is boring to play, play against and watch. But would you agree that the problematic part is the "into", not the actual phoenix openers ? If P opened phoenix every game but had a variety of viable transitions I'm pretty sure no one would be complaining. I think it would help if there was an alternative if you want to go into macro play. I guess variety for the followup would help a good deal already. I'm not terrbily optimistic about the state of Zerg in ZvP lategame though, if Protoss gets more options that could get problematic. What I fail to understand is that even if mutas were nerfed to the ground, it doesn't change the fact that opening phoenix is very safe, all-around and strong. So I'm unsure this move will really change the situation. As I said before I would still go phoenix every game even if mutas didn't exist. "What I fail to understand is that even if mutas were nerfed to the ground, it doesn't change the fact that opening phoenix is very safe, all-around and strong." Correlation does not imply causation. You fail to understand why mutas being nerfed into the ground will be a good thing.. then why are you blindly advocating it so much. Can you plz go over the details of how it would be better and how it'll affect every matchup for zerg and not just PVZ. Seeing you're only talking PVZ throughout like 10 comments.
Muta regen, oracle speed and mediboost = the unholy trinity that made HotS mostly a disaster. I'll never miss an opportunity to state how harmful those things have been for the game. As for my comment I try to think like David Kim and try to achieve more diversity and I don't think this will do the trick. It's even worse than that if phoenix weren't needed in the current state of the game if I am to believe HuK's tweet : all P want to do is pump out immortals all game long...
|
On April 19 2016 08:28 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 07:51 ArgusDreamer wrote:On April 19 2016 05:15 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 05:04 Elentos wrote:On April 19 2016 04:59 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 04:52 Elentos wrote:On April 19 2016 04:50 crbox wrote:
Rofl this is the worst solution ever. Static defense in sc2 is so ridiculously strong, it encourages low skill turtle, low apm play, and there's no swarm or anything to nullify them (well vipers, but it's just not convenient)...
What's wrong with going phoenixes? They're great, mobile units which require some sort of skill to use. You had to go 'sairs in PvZ to avoid being steamrolled by mutas in BW, seems to me it's the same principle, carried over from the greatest RTS of all time.
I don't see the issue of going phoenix tbh Protoss has turned to going phoenix into double robo chargelot/immortal every single game against Zerg, which is boring to play, play against and watch. But would you agree that the problematic part is the "into", not the actual phoenix openers ? If P opened phoenix every game but had a variety of viable transitions I'm pretty sure no one would be complaining. I think it would help if there was an alternative if you want to go into macro play. I guess variety for the followup would help a good deal already. I'm not terrbily optimistic about the state of Zerg in ZvP lategame though, if Protoss gets more options that could get problematic. What I fail to understand is that even if mutas were nerfed to the ground, it doesn't change the fact that opening phoenix is very safe, all-around and strong. So I'm unsure this move will really change the situation. As I said before I would still go phoenix every game even if mutas didn't exist. "What I fail to understand is that even if mutas were nerfed to the ground, it doesn't change the fact that opening phoenix is very safe, all-around and strong." Correlation does not imply causation. You fail to understand why mutas being nerfed into the ground will be a good thing.. then why are you blindly advocating it so much. Can you plz go over the details of how it would be better and how it'll affect every matchup for zerg and not just PVZ. Seeing you're only talking PVZ throughout like 10 comments. Muta regen, oracle speed and mediboost = the unholy trinity that made HotS mostly a disaster. I'll never miss an opportunity to state how harmful those things have been for the game. As for my comment I try to think like David Kim and try to achieve more diversity and I don't think this will do the trick. It's even worse than that if phoenix weren't needed in the current state of the game if I am to believe HuK's tweet : all P want to do is pump out immortals all game long...
It's not facts, it's your opinion. Personnaly, I think these three things contributed to make HotS much better than WoL.
Besides, you probably have realized that HuK was being sarcastic when answering to Bly.
|
On April 19 2016 08:40 Gwavajuice wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 08:28 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 07:51 ArgusDreamer wrote:On April 19 2016 05:15 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 05:04 Elentos wrote:On April 19 2016 04:59 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 04:52 Elentos wrote:On April 19 2016 04:50 crbox wrote:
Rofl this is the worst solution ever. Static defense in sc2 is so ridiculously strong, it encourages low skill turtle, low apm play, and there's no swarm or anything to nullify them (well vipers, but it's just not convenient)...
What's wrong with going phoenixes? They're great, mobile units which require some sort of skill to use. You had to go 'sairs in PvZ to avoid being steamrolled by mutas in BW, seems to me it's the same principle, carried over from the greatest RTS of all time.
I don't see the issue of going phoenix tbh Protoss has turned to going phoenix into double robo chargelot/immortal every single game against Zerg, which is boring to play, play against and watch. But would you agree that the problematic part is the "into", not the actual phoenix openers ? If P opened phoenix every game but had a variety of viable transitions I'm pretty sure no one would be complaining. I think it would help if there was an alternative if you want to go into macro play. I guess variety for the followup would help a good deal already. I'm not terrbily optimistic about the state of Zerg in ZvP lategame though, if Protoss gets more options that could get problematic. What I fail to understand is that even if mutas were nerfed to the ground, it doesn't change the fact that opening phoenix is very safe, all-around and strong. So I'm unsure this move will really change the situation. As I said before I would still go phoenix every game even if mutas didn't exist. "What I fail to understand is that even if mutas were nerfed to the ground, it doesn't change the fact that opening phoenix is very safe, all-around and strong." Correlation does not imply causation. You fail to understand why mutas being nerfed into the ground will be a good thing.. then why are you blindly advocating it so much. Can you plz go over the details of how it would be better and how it'll affect every matchup for zerg and not just PVZ. Seeing you're only talking PVZ throughout like 10 comments. Muta regen, oracle speed and mediboost = the unholy trinity that made HotS mostly a disaster. I'll never miss an opportunity to state how harmful those things have been for the game. As for my comment I try to think like David Kim and try to achieve more diversity and I don't think this will do the trick. It's even worse than that if phoenix weren't needed in the current state of the game if I am to believe HuK's tweet : all P want to do is pump out immortals all game long... It's not facts, it's your opinion. Personnaly, I think these three things contributed to make HotS much better than WoL. Besides, you probably have realized that HuK was being sarcastic when answering to Bly.
Never said it was anything else than my personal opinion. By the way are you really sure he's being sarcastic ?
|
On April 19 2016 08:21 Gwavajuice wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 08:09 DonDomingo wrote:Oh, sorry for not specifying, I meant actual players, not foreigners :D Everybody's word is important, that's why you are allowed to give your opinions I think it safe to say that most Protoss players complain about this, whatever their country or their level, simply because having only one option, even if it's a strong one, is not good in the long run. To have a healthy meta, we need variety of strats, that's why phoenix into PICA in every PvZ game is bad and tankivacs marine mirror in every TvT is bad too. (To be fair, we had Dear doing disruptor drop openings vs Losira, but he always ended up with PICA in mid/late game) edit : typos
I didn't offer any opinions :D Only facts and a question.
Guess some viewers and players like variety. Personally, I dont mind seeing the same compositions and openings over and over. I appreciate watching good execution and clever suble build deviations.
|
On April 19 2016 08:28 [PkF] Wire wrote:
Muta regen, oracle speed and mediboost = the unholy trinity that made HotS mostly a disaster. I'll never miss an opportunity to state how harmful those things have been for the game. As for my comment I try to think like David Kim and try to achieve more diversity and I don't think this will do the trick. It's even worse than that if phoenix weren't needed in the current state of the game if I am to believe HuK's tweet : all P want to do is pump out immortals all game long...
I think one of the biggest design flaws from HotS is the notion that being a fun unit justifies it having much more power. Medivac Boost is probably the biggest offender of this. Muta buff, Mothership Core, Phoenix speed was all changed because of this.
|
On April 19 2016 04:20 Gwavajuice wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:01 RoomOfMush wrote:
I also want to throw in that I am not a fan of muta regeneration (or super high in general).
ATTENTION! THIS IS OVERSIMPLIFIED:
The reason is it takes strategy out of the game. With regular units you have to calculate whether an attack is worth it or not. You are trading muta hitpoints for damage dealt to enemy economy. Muta hitpoints correspond to spent resources and time.
The question always is: Is it worth to kill X workers if I take Y damage?
But with super high regeneration you dont lose anything. Attacking is the default option and there is no thinking process. Every time you are not attacking (other then to regen) you are losing value. I'm not sure I agree with you here, cause all in all this whole reasoning could be done with spore crawlers and their buff vs Bio worked very well : it countered the mass Muta vs mass Muta meta and didn't change anything else in the game. Photo canon buff could do the same. Moreover, that way Muta keep their power in open battles where they a cool tool for zerg but far from being OP. Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:50 Shuffleblade wrote:
Erm mutas already have a niche and rare spot in ZvP as it stands. Protoss have gotten just more and more effective ways to deal with them, nerfing them even more in the matchup seems unjustified to me.
Btw I find it hilarious that they think cannon buff is going to help against mass muta switches.... Thats just stupid, even if the P builds 6 cannons at each base 40 mutas roflstomp it, probably not losing a single one unless the cannons are lucky with their shots or the cannons are very close together. That would not effect the matchup much besides making it even more stupid to open muta in zvp and overlord drops would also be easier to defend.
Protoss does not need stronger defense, come on. 1- show me how they deal with them without massing phoenixes? the whole point of the debate is about allowing Protosses to stop using phoenix in every PvZ, FYI. 2 - that's not true, just look how spore crawler buff changed ZvZ.
1.The entirely of hots P handled mutas without "massing phoenix", how did lotv buff mutas so hard that every protoss have to blind counter them now? The answer is they didn't, no P opens phoenix because they are afraid of dying to mutas.
They open phoenix because their prefered build are weak to mutas so they need the phoenix to cover their weakness. Let me explain, Protoss wants fast three base into double robo immortal. Why does protoss want this? Because atm immortal is OP (or every other protoss unit is underpowered), every P wants immortals, many and fast.
So tell me, what is greedy build into double robo immortal production weak to? "ding dong" correct, mutas. So the answer to this is actually pretty simple, address the fact that every protoss builds immortals and the second "problem" of every protoss going stargate will solve itself.
2. Dude, the spore crawler change didn't change late game 40 mutas scenario. It changed the early game builds, which is exactly what I said that a cannon buff would do as well. In the spore crawler buff scenario, mutas were an overwhelmingly common strategy. 2 base builds mostly, they rushed them out. Buffing the sc to address early game muta builds is 100% logical and it worked.
Buffing pc to discourage late game massive tech-switch into mutas, not so much. You should read the inital post it seems you don't understand the difference between addressing an early game problem and a late game problem. A small tweak like this effects the early game, the less mutas we are talking about the greater the effect, but when we are talking massive techswitch its a effect is close to nil.
|
On April 19 2016 08:07 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Apparently there are some
I doubt there are many people who would rather see the same builds forever over the option of seeing multiple kinds of builds, openings, mid-games and the like -- so that strategic players can choose to approach the game from more than just the narrowest of angles (which are properly termed tactics).
Phoenix openers will always exist. They're very good.
It'd be nice if they weren't the only reliable way to play macro PvZ. Diversity increases strategy. Honestly, I can't see why anyone'd theoretically be against phoenix seeing less play in PvZ. For that to be the case, though, there's going to have to be either a nerf to mutas or a buff to something Protoss.
Mutas are simply too much of a threat otherwise.
P.S. I doubt that Harstem was being serious ... the extremely long period of opening phoenix in every match-up, though, would certainly get most (foreigner) players playing around with non-phoenix openers if there were even a hint that such a thing might not put you irrevocably behind a Zerg opponent. Koreans might take longer (because they're best at practicing a thing until they can do it nearly perfectly), but a switch would happen there too: simply for surprise openings, if for no other reason.
|
It's worrying that blizzard needs feedback to recognize that protoss always opens phoenix because of mutas.
Like they don't understand their own game.
|
On April 19 2016 09:01 Shuffleblade wrote:
1.The entirely of hots P handled mutas without "massing phoenix", how did lotv buff mutas so hard that every protoss have to blind counter them now?
2-base pushes (which the Protoss did quite a bit versus Zerg in HotS) were intended to force the Zerg to invest gas into units to defend (which weakened any possible Muta switch by pre-emptively forcing the use of the gas). These kinds of 2-base pushes don't work in LotV mainly due to a few things:
- Speedlings are cheap and give very fast map-control to the Zerg. They can see any Protoss ground force coming and build units as the forces move across the map.
- Ravagers mean that forcefields are much less powerful.
- 12-worker start gives faster access to a higher income-rate (which is the main thing required for a mutalisk switch, banked resources)
- Fewer resources per base lessens the power of 2-base pushes (esp the low-value minerals which mine out super-fast, taking the wind out of all possible reinforcements to keep up pressure or try to fall back while securing a third)
Not all of these things are bad. All of them do, however, contribute to the much faster capability (relatively) to tech-switch into mutalisks.
Protoss, on the other hand, still has to have a mass of resources devoted into getting two stargates, production time, and investment into Phoenixes to be able to counter Mutalisks. Protoss' primary investment against a mutalisk switch is time for infrastructure.
In HotS, this was more easily possible because (1) the Zerg had less gas due to the Protoss' pressure, (2) if in a really-tight spot, you could fall back to 2-base and still mine somewhat efficiently for a short time, (3) due to (1) the Mutalisks appeared in dribbles and drabs ... you could see the tech switch coming and prepare with a little bit of lee-way before there were 20+ Mutas eating probes.
On April 19 2016 09:01 Shuffleblade wrote:
2. Dude, the spore crawler change didn't change late game 40 mutas scenario.
And that's all Protoss needs too. A better delaying tactic, so that the initial 15 or so mutas easily possible with LotV (or even 20+) can be staved off with existing forces (archons? stalkers? a couple of chrono-boosted phoenix?) and defenses which are slightly-more effective instead of simply dying to the switch.
The spore buff helps in 40-muta switches too. With a little splash (fungal ... storm), and a few defenses (spores ... cannons) mutas can be effectively reduced in number to a force you can mop-up -- which allows your army a lot more freedom to try to apply counter-damage or secure other expansions.
I still think nerfing muta regen would be a better change, but a cannon buff could work (depending upon numbers).
|
On April 19 2016 07:32 Tresher wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). Have to agree with this one. Mutalisks didn´t need more speed or regeneration and only made this Unit stupid and more annoying as it already is. Running back and forth between point A and B just to catch Units is not fun its frustating. But they did this with a couple of other Units that were actually good as they were which didn´t need it like Oracles and Medivacs (Altough Aenion Crystals was before HotS). Stop this bandaiding.
You're wrong. Killing workers is the coolest thing in the game.
|
Does anyone else think it is one of the dumbest ideas, and that this suggestion came from a guy who has never ever ranked and is completely garbage as a player? Source
Player profile from the link.
He has 210 total career games, never been ranked in 1v1 or teams. THE "COMMUNITY" IDEA IS FROM SOMEONE WHO HAS NEVER PLAYED LADDER.
|
Make muta regen a hive level buff.
|
Buff everything! that seems to work.
|
Well Muta regen is one issue, which took away the viability of HT + Stalkers to deal with mutas (which was IMO a way more interesting playstyle). Protoss' dismal AA options is the other issue as they have the lowest DPS defensive structure and lowest DPS (and particularly DPS/cost) AtG unit. While you could change Stalker AA damage, you'd have to pair that with a corresponding nerf. Personally, I've been advocating buffing Stalker DPS overall and nerfing their health and turn them into more a "sniper" type of unit.
I do think AA damage of the Photon Cannon should be buffed from a design perspective, as they are woefully bad at deterring air attacks, and then things adjusted around that. But given Blizz has already flat out said they are taking more or less a bandaid approach to balance I think this +bio AA damage is the best we can hope for.
I also think people seriously overestimate how pervasive Stargate openers will be if adequate alternatives to deal with Mutas are introduced. It may still be the most popular tech opener, but any deviation from 100% stargate will open up build diversity not only on Protoss' side, but also on Zerg's side since Zerg is more of a reactionary race.
|
Mutalisk are utter garbage in zvp why would they even bother to nerf them? Phoneix opener is so good, thats the fact. Protoss are not forced to do it because of muta, they are doing it because it makes protoss start ahead of zerg unlike other openings. Making phoneix guarantees you AT LEAST 5 drone + 1 Queen kill + 6 forced spores + map control, etc.. On the other hand, if a zerg player decides to make mutas, he won't able to kill not even a single probe most likely and will lose the game to the first incoming push.
|
and no one realizes that this bandaid would doom SC2 to a level of "only cannon rush" games?
|
David Kim spends too much time reading the feedback of low level players on reddit.
He doesn't appear to play or watch a whole lot, I'd be willing to bet he only watches GSL and the occasional proleague match if he is notified something unusual occured and then the major tournaments outside of Korea.
If he would spend time playing the game or watching the daily tournaments closely he'd have a much better grasp of the what the current meta is.
If you read every single reddit comment, then yes, his suggestions at times makes sense because a lot of people who don't have a clue bring up weird points about the game which affects them at the gold or platinum level, but the truth is, those people are bad. if you start balancing the game for people who are bad, you are almost always also affecting the upper skill levels in a bad way.
If the game is too unforgiving and frustating and not fun for bad players, because you implemented gimmicky units, unforgiving gameplay and insane harass that can turn the tide of a game in a second, then that's a design problem. If you want to make those people happy & enjoy their time playing make DESIGN changes, do not make balance changes or tweak numbers to bandaid this core problem.
This change is ridiculous. Muta is a very one off chance that might work in a very small number of PvZ's in which Zerg was lucky enough to snipe all the phoenix, and catch protoss off guard while he let the Zerg build a big enough bank for the muta switch to be big enough to do something as soon as it hits the field.
This can be usefull in the phase of the game where there are 10+ immortals on the field and ground compositions dont really have a chance anymore vs the protoss army, so I think it's good. It doesn't need a change. Protoss doesn't need a buff to cannon AA.
If you buff cannon AA you are also buffing late game tempest/cannon/oracle/templar turtle/camp styles which are already impossible to beat if Zerg doesn't shut down protoss before it's too late.
Something has to change at the core of how David Kim operates and judges feedback about his game, he should start playing more but if that's not realistic, at least WATCH daily tournaments, get a twitter account and keep in touch with your game. The guy is so removed from the actual community of people who invest a lot of time into SC...
|
The problem with PvZ was never the phoenix. The problem is mass 2x robo immortals...a play which just so happens to be weak to a midgame muta switch...
Lack of build diversity right now is due to the fact that immortals are just too damn strong and immortal archon outshines everything else...and thank the heavens that P haven't started making a carrier late game the standard yet...
|
|
|
I think there needs to be a clear distinction drawn between balance changes and game design type changes. Clearly this would fall in the latter. I would argue that it's better and easier to design a good game and then worry about balance than the other way around.
The +bio damage on cannon AA attack is a perfect example of this. There must come a point where as a game designer you realize it's going to be better to actually tackle the main issue (Mutas) rather than try to fix issues around it with +bio damage on Spores and now Cannons. In fact, this couldn't be a better time to revisit this since they are also tinkering with the Thor's (and possibly Liberator's) role in the whole AA equation.
Also why have such a cautious philosophy on a balance test map? This type of environment should be for more wild experimentation! I would LOVE if D. Kim actually had some balls to do more drastic balance changes that shakes up the meta, say between seasons (look at Ice Frog w/ DotA for example).
|
On April 19 2016 04:01 RoomOfMush wrote:
But with super high regeneration you dont lose anything. Attacking is the default option and there is no thinking process. Every time you are not attacking (other then to regen) you are losing value.
Same goes for medivacs or repair, both could be easily fixed by medivacs only healing marines _inside_ the medivac and repair inactivating the repaired unit or building while being repaired (same for transfuse btw).
|
That will also be a nerf to corruptors, better make it "vs mutalisks" photon cannon buff.
|
On April 19 2016 09:40 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 07:32 Tresher wrote:On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). Have to agree with this one. Mutalisks didn´t need more speed or regeneration and only made this Unit stupid and more annoying as it already is. Running back and forth between point A and B just to catch Units is not fun its frustating. But they did this with a couple of other Units that were actually good as they were which didn´t need it like Oracles and Medivacs (Altough Aenion Crystals was before HotS). Stop this bandaiding. You're wrong. Killing workers is the coolest thing in the game.
You guys should make a note when you are sarcastic. But according to David Kim it is true .
|
On April 19 2016 09:38 Edowyth wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 09:01 Shuffleblade wrote:
1.The entirely of hots P handled mutas without "massing phoenix", how did lotv buff mutas so hard that every protoss have to blind counter them now? 2-base pushes (which the Protoss did quite a bit versus Zerg in HotS) were intended to force the Zerg to invest gas into units to defend (which weakened any possible Muta switch by pre-emptively forcing the use of the gas). These kinds of 2-base pushes don't work in LotV mainly due to a few things: - Speedlings are cheap and give very fast map-control to the Zerg. They can see any Protoss ground force coming and build units as the forces move across the map. - Ravagers mean that forcefields are much less powerful. - 12-worker start gives faster access to a higher income-rate (which is the main thing required for a mutalisk switch, banked resources) - Fewer resources per base lessens the power of 2-base pushes (esp the low-value minerals which mine out super-fast, taking the wind out of all possible reinforcements to keep up pressure or try to fall back while securing a third) Not all of these things are bad. All of them do, however, contribute to the much faster capability (relatively) to tech-switch into mutalisks. Protoss, on the other hand, still has to have a mass of resources devoted into getting two stargates, production time, and investment into Phoenixes to be able to counter Mutalisks. Protoss' primary investment against a mutalisk switch is time for infrastructure.In HotS, this was more easily possible because (1) the Zerg had less gas due to the Protoss' pressure, (2) if in a really-tight spot, you could fall back to 2-base and still mine somewhat efficiently for a short time, (3) due to (1) the Mutalisks appeared in dribbles and drabs ... you could see the tech switch coming and prepare with a little bit of lee-way before there were 20+ Mutas eating probes. Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 09:01 Shuffleblade wrote:
2. Dude, the spore crawler change didn't change late game 40 mutas scenario. And that's all Protoss needs too. A better delaying tactic, so that the initial 15 or so mutas easily possible with LotV (or even 20+) can be staved off with existing forces (archons? stalkers? a couple of chrono-boosted phoenix?) and defenses which are slightly-more effective instead of simply dying to the switch. The spore buff helps in 40-muta switches too. With a little splash (fungal ... storm), and a few defenses (spores ... cannons) mutas can be effectively reduced in number to a force you can mop-up -- which allows your army a lot more freedom to try to apply counter-damage or secure other expansions. I still think nerfing muta regen would be a better change, but a cannon buff could work (depending upon numbers).
I disagree with your reasoning.
You make it sound like 2 base attacks in PvZ were designed to hinder mutas, this is not true. Accordning to your reasoning the games that P did not push on 2 base the Z would kill P with mutas, this was not the case. P handled mutas just fine in hots without 2 base pushes by utilizing blinkstalkers and Phoenix. Commonly P opened Oracle to have a stargate on hand if P needed to produce Phoenix against mutas. There were never a need to prematurely build Phoenix, it was done reactionary. In late game scenarios P added a second stargate as a safety precausion that weren't used unless Z Went for the muta switch.
The two base pushs you describe here sounds like all-in pushes to me, standard two base pressure builds work in lotv but all-ins genereally don't for two reasons that you stated.
- Ravagers and their ability to crush FF.
- The bases run out of minerals and thus the all-in fails.
Regarding lings being cheap and giving fast map-control, this is not unique to lotv, zerg has always had fast and cheap lings since wol. Regarding the economy it does not in fact effect muta builds the way that you describe, the economy does not give faster income rate to zerg (compared to terran and protoss). The races are still balanced in that regard, at least the zerg is not favored.
The main reason you don't see protoss being as aggresive in PvZ anymore is because with lotv the macro edge has passed from Z to P. In hots zerg were the macro race, they were the race that could use their defensive advantage to be greedy and get an edge in a macro game. In hots zerg all-ins and pressure builds were rare, instead we got the 3 hatch before pool build. In lotv its actually the protoss that has the strong defensive advantage and the macro edge. In P knows that they can be ahead by macroing why would they pressure or all-in? They don't atm because the meta is currently that P has the advantage in a macro game. Zerg used to need to be ahead a whole base with saturation,, that happens very rarely nowadays. You can argue that it is balanced out since Z has gotten new units that are more cost efficient and that would be partly true. Zerg is more cost efficient atm but their macro position has worsened more than their efficiency has improved.
Its not that 2 base pressure builds do not work, it is that protoss have no reason to properly explore those builds atm.
The reason that mutas came slower or in smaller chunks during hots was because the protoss was pressuring, as you say. Through attacking and scouting they found out what was happening and had time to prepare. I think its rediculous that protoss think that they are supposed to go "fast third nexus, double robo immortal with double forge".... "oh no, he has 20 mutas, obviously I am supposed to be able to defend against these without scouting or actually doing anything else out on the map!!! Yeah, lets buff the the PC so absolutely nothing can kill me while going all out greed with Tech and upgrades!"
Seriously, if you are going quick third base no pressure into rouble robo with forge and expect to be safe from all Z openings without scouting properly something is wrong. I think that the way P plays the game atm is not good. I don't Believe that P have to get ahead in macro to have a change against Z but if its true then lurker and possibly ultralisk needs to get nerfed.
Its the builds that P goes for that is the problem, not mutas or anything else. P builds adepts and immortals and for some reason those two units are weak against mutas...
|
On April 19 2016 17:36 Shuffleblade wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 09:38 Edowyth wrote:On April 19 2016 09:01 Shuffleblade wrote:
1.The entirely of hots P handled mutas without "massing phoenix", how did lotv buff mutas so hard that every protoss have to blind counter them now? 2-base pushes (which the Protoss did quite a bit versus Zerg in HotS) were intended to force the Zerg to invest gas into units to defend (which weakened any possible Muta switch by pre-emptively forcing the use of the gas). These kinds of 2-base pushes don't work in LotV mainly due to a few things: - Speedlings are cheap and give very fast map-control to the Zerg. They can see any Protoss ground force coming and build units as the forces move across the map. - Ravagers mean that forcefields are much less powerful. - 12-worker start gives faster access to a higher income-rate (which is the main thing required for a mutalisk switch, banked resources) - Fewer resources per base lessens the power of 2-base pushes (esp the low-value minerals which mine out super-fast, taking the wind out of all possible reinforcements to keep up pressure or try to fall back while securing a third) Not all of these things are bad. All of them do, however, contribute to the much faster capability (relatively) to tech-switch into mutalisks. Protoss, on the other hand, still has to have a mass of resources devoted into getting two stargates, production time, and investment into Phoenixes to be able to counter Mutalisks. Protoss' primary investment against a mutalisk switch is time for infrastructure.In HotS, this was more easily possible because (1) the Zerg had less gas due to the Protoss' pressure, (2) if in a really-tight spot, you could fall back to 2-base and still mine somewhat efficiently for a short time, (3) due to (1) the Mutalisks appeared in dribbles and drabs ... you could see the tech switch coming and prepare with a little bit of lee-way before there were 20+ Mutas eating probes. On April 19 2016 09:01 Shuffleblade wrote:
2. Dude, the spore crawler change didn't change late game 40 mutas scenario. And that's all Protoss needs too. A better delaying tactic, so that the initial 15 or so mutas easily possible with LotV (or even 20+) can be staved off with existing forces (archons? stalkers? a couple of chrono-boosted phoenix?) and defenses which are slightly-more effective instead of simply dying to the switch. The spore buff helps in 40-muta switches too. With a little splash (fungal ... storm), and a few defenses (spores ... cannons) mutas can be effectively reduced in number to a force you can mop-up -- which allows your army a lot more freedom to try to apply counter-damage or secure other expansions. I still think nerfing muta regen would be a better change, but a cannon buff could work (depending upon numbers). I disagree with your reasoning. You make it sound like 2 base attacks in PvZ were designed to hinder mutas, this is not true. Accordning to your reasoning the games that P did not push on 2 base the Z would kill P with mutas, this was not the case. P handled mutas just fine in hots without 2 base pushes by utilizing blinkstalkers and Phoenix. Commonly P opened Oracle to have a stargate on hand if P needed to produce Phoenix against mutas. There were never a need to prematurely build Phoenix, it was done reactionary. In late game scenarios P added a second stargate as a safety precausion that weren't used unless Z Went for the muta switch. The two base pushs you describe here sounds like all-in pushes to me, standard two base pressure builds work in lotv but all-ins genereally don't for two reasons that you stated. - Ravagers and their ability to crush FF. - The bases run out of minerals and thus the all-in fails. Regarding lings being cheap and giving fast map-control, this is not unique to lotv, zerg has always had fast and cheap lings since wol. Regarding the economy it does not in fact effect muta builds the way that you describe, the economy does not give faster income rate to zerg (compared to terran and protoss). The races are still balanced in that regard, at least the zerg is not favored. The main reason you don't see protoss being as aggresive in PvZ anymore is because with lotv the macro edge has passed from Z to P. In hots zerg were the macro race, they were the race that could use their defensive advantage to be greedy and get an edge in a macro game. In hots zerg all-ins and pressure builds were rare, instead we got the 3 hatch before pool build. In lotv its actually the protoss that has the strong defensive advantage and the macro edge. In P knows that they can be ahead by macroing why would they pressure or all-in? They don't atm because the meta is currently that P has the advantage in a macro game. Zerg used to need to be ahead a whole base with saturation,, that happens very rarely nowadays. You can argue that it is balanced out since Z has gotten new units that are more cost efficient and that would be partly true. Zerg is more cost efficient atm but their macro position has worsened more than their efficiency has improved. Its not that 2 base pressure builds do not work, it is that protoss have no reason to properly explore those builds atm. The reason that mutas came slower or in smaller chunks during hots was because the protoss was pressuring, as you say. Through attacking and scouting they found out what was happening and had time to prepare. I think its rediculous that protoss think that they are supposed to go "fast third nexus, double robo immortal with double forge".... "oh no, he has 20 mutas, obviously I am supposed to be able to defend against these without scouting or actually doing anything else out on the map!!! Yeah, lets buff the the PC so absolutely nothing can kill me while going all out greed with Tech and upgrades!" Seriously, if you are going quick third base no pressure into rouble robo with forge and expect to be safe from all Z openings without scouting properly something is wrong. I think that the way P plays the game atm is not good. I don't Believe that P have to get ahead in macro to have a change against Z but if its true then lurker and possibly ultralisk needs to get nerfed. Its the builds that P goes for that is the problem, not mutas or anything else. P builds adepts and immortals and for some reason those two units are weak against mutas...
You guys are both wrong. It's very simple really. Stalkers + sentries countered every unit in hots.
However in Lotv, Stalkers get shut down so hard by lurkers it's silly. So you don't see stalker based compositions anymore in every single game. That makes mutalisk more attractive because in a lot of games anti air will be limited. Which in turn gets nullified by protoss opening with lots of phoenix.
|
On April 19 2016 17:47 Comedy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 17:36 Shuffleblade wrote:On April 19 2016 09:38 Edowyth wrote:On April 19 2016 09:01 Shuffleblade wrote:
1.The entirely of hots P handled mutas without "massing phoenix", how did lotv buff mutas so hard that every protoss have to blind counter them now? 2-base pushes (which the Protoss did quite a bit versus Zerg in HotS) were intended to force the Zerg to invest gas into units to defend (which weakened any possible Muta switch by pre-emptively forcing the use of the gas). These kinds of 2-base pushes don't work in LotV mainly due to a few things: - Speedlings are cheap and give very fast map-control to the Zerg. They can see any Protoss ground force coming and build units as the forces move across the map. - Ravagers mean that forcefields are much less powerful. - 12-worker start gives faster access to a higher income-rate (which is the main thing required for a mutalisk switch, banked resources) - Fewer resources per base lessens the power of 2-base pushes (esp the low-value minerals which mine out super-fast, taking the wind out of all possible reinforcements to keep up pressure or try to fall back while securing a third) Not all of these things are bad. All of them do, however, contribute to the much faster capability (relatively) to tech-switch into mutalisks. Protoss, on the other hand, still has to have a mass of resources devoted into getting two stargates, production time, and investment into Phoenixes to be able to counter Mutalisks. Protoss' primary investment against a mutalisk switch is time for infrastructure.In HotS, this was more easily possible because (1) the Zerg had less gas due to the Protoss' pressure, (2) if in a really-tight spot, you could fall back to 2-base and still mine somewhat efficiently for a short time, (3) due to (1) the Mutalisks appeared in dribbles and drabs ... you could see the tech switch coming and prepare with a little bit of lee-way before there were 20+ Mutas eating probes. On April 19 2016 09:01 Shuffleblade wrote:
2. Dude, the spore crawler change didn't change late game 40 mutas scenario. And that's all Protoss needs too. A better delaying tactic, so that the initial 15 or so mutas easily possible with LotV (or even 20+) can be staved off with existing forces (archons? stalkers? a couple of chrono-boosted phoenix?) and defenses which are slightly-more effective instead of simply dying to the switch. The spore buff helps in 40-muta switches too. With a little splash (fungal ... storm), and a few defenses (spores ... cannons) mutas can be effectively reduced in number to a force you can mop-up -- which allows your army a lot more freedom to try to apply counter-damage or secure other expansions. I still think nerfing muta regen would be a better change, but a cannon buff could work (depending upon numbers). I disagree with your reasoning. You make it sound like 2 base attacks in PvZ were designed to hinder mutas, this is not true. Accordning to your reasoning the games that P did not push on 2 base the Z would kill P with mutas, this was not the case. P handled mutas just fine in hots without 2 base pushes by utilizing blinkstalkers and Phoenix. Commonly P opened Oracle to have a stargate on hand if P needed to produce Phoenix against mutas. There were never a need to prematurely build Phoenix, it was done reactionary. In late game scenarios P added a second stargate as a safety precausion that weren't used unless Z Went for the muta switch. The two base pushs you describe here sounds like all-in pushes to me, standard two base pressure builds work in lotv but all-ins genereally don't for two reasons that you stated. - Ravagers and their ability to crush FF. - The bases run out of minerals and thus the all-in fails. Regarding lings being cheap and giving fast map-control, this is not unique to lotv, zerg has always had fast and cheap lings since wol. Regarding the economy it does not in fact effect muta builds the way that you describe, the economy does not give faster income rate to zerg (compared to terran and protoss). The races are still balanced in that regard, at least the zerg is not favored. The main reason you don't see protoss being as aggresive in PvZ anymore is because with lotv the macro edge has passed from Z to P. In hots zerg were the macro race, they were the race that could use their defensive advantage to be greedy and get an edge in a macro game. In hots zerg all-ins and pressure builds were rare, instead we got the 3 hatch before pool build. In lotv its actually the protoss that has the strong defensive advantage and the macro edge. In P knows that they can be ahead by macroing why would they pressure or all-in? They don't atm because the meta is currently that P has the advantage in a macro game. Zerg used to need to be ahead a whole base with saturation,, that happens very rarely nowadays. You can argue that it is balanced out since Z has gotten new units that are more cost efficient and that would be partly true. Zerg is more cost efficient atm but their macro position has worsened more than their efficiency has improved. Its not that 2 base pressure builds do not work, it is that protoss have no reason to properly explore those builds atm. The reason that mutas came slower or in smaller chunks during hots was because the protoss was pressuring, as you say. Through attacking and scouting they found out what was happening and had time to prepare. I think its rediculous that protoss think that they are supposed to go "fast third nexus, double robo immortal with double forge".... "oh no, he has 20 mutas, obviously I am supposed to be able to defend against these without scouting or actually doing anything else out on the map!!! Yeah, lets buff the the PC so absolutely nothing can kill me while going all out greed with Tech and upgrades!" Seriously, if you are going quick third base no pressure into rouble robo with forge and expect to be safe from all Z openings without scouting properly something is wrong. I think that the way P plays the game atm is not good. I don't Believe that P have to get ahead in macro to have a change against Z but if its true then lurker and possibly ultralisk needs to get nerfed. Its the builds that P goes for that is the problem, not mutas or anything else. P builds adepts and immortals and for some reason those two units are weak against mutas... You guys are both wrong. It's very simple really. Stalkers + sentries countered every unit in hots. However in Lotv, Stalkers get shut down so hard by lurkers it's silly. So you don't see stalker based compositions anymore in every single game. That makes mutalisk more attractive because in a lot of games anti air will be limited. Which in turn gets nullified by protoss opening with lots of phoenix.
I don't really get where you are coming from. Blinkstalkers alone(or with sentries) were very rarely a late game composition. Colossus ruled PvZ in hots. Mass stalkers have never been the late game go-to composition, they have Always been a stepping stone and they still are. Even if zerg gets lurkers (which is mid-late game) blinkstalkers can stall for time and transition.
Ofc stalkers are not core every single game with adepts in the game and immortal being so powerful, this is exactly what I've been saying -_-
|
adepts shoot air problem solved
|
Flat 14 damage against air for stalkers would help both PvZ and PvP. Protoss has lacked good anti-air ground units since WoL day one. Buffing the cannon does nothing against a muta tech switch because mutas kill the protoss army and it's gg anyway.
Pretty much everyone agrees most air units are too strong and harassment should not be so easy. I would remove muta health regen, nerf the oracle speed and ranged prism pickup. Lower the turbo speed duration of medivacs (or remove it) and nerf phoenix speed. And ofc nerf the liberator AG range and AA damage 
|
On April 19 2016 18:55 Shuffleblade wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 17:47 Comedy wrote:On April 19 2016 17:36 Shuffleblade wrote:On April 19 2016 09:38 Edowyth wrote:On April 19 2016 09:01 Shuffleblade wrote:
1.The entirely of hots P handled mutas without "massing phoenix", how did lotv buff mutas so hard that every protoss have to blind counter them now? 2-base pushes (which the Protoss did quite a bit versus Zerg in HotS) were intended to force the Zerg to invest gas into units to defend (which weakened any possible Muta switch by pre-emptively forcing the use of the gas). These kinds of 2-base pushes don't work in LotV mainly due to a few things: - Speedlings are cheap and give very fast map-control to the Zerg. They can see any Protoss ground force coming and build units as the forces move across the map. - Ravagers mean that forcefields are much less powerful. - 12-worker start gives faster access to a higher income-rate (which is the main thing required for a mutalisk switch, banked resources) - Fewer resources per base lessens the power of 2-base pushes (esp the low-value minerals which mine out super-fast, taking the wind out of all possible reinforcements to keep up pressure or try to fall back while securing a third) Not all of these things are bad. All of them do, however, contribute to the much faster capability (relatively) to tech-switch into mutalisks. Protoss, on the other hand, still has to have a mass of resources devoted into getting two stargates, production time, and investment into Phoenixes to be able to counter Mutalisks. Protoss' primary investment against a mutalisk switch is time for infrastructure.In HotS, this was more easily possible because (1) the Zerg had less gas due to the Protoss' pressure, (2) if in a really-tight spot, you could fall back to 2-base and still mine somewhat efficiently for a short time, (3) due to (1) the Mutalisks appeared in dribbles and drabs ... you could see the tech switch coming and prepare with a little bit of lee-way before there were 20+ Mutas eating probes. On April 19 2016 09:01 Shuffleblade wrote:
2. Dude, the spore crawler change didn't change late game 40 mutas scenario. And that's all Protoss needs too. A better delaying tactic, so that the initial 15 or so mutas easily possible with LotV (or even 20+) can be staved off with existing forces (archons? stalkers? a couple of chrono-boosted phoenix?) and defenses which are slightly-more effective instead of simply dying to the switch. The spore buff helps in 40-muta switches too. With a little splash (fungal ... storm), and a few defenses (spores ... cannons) mutas can be effectively reduced in number to a force you can mop-up -- which allows your army a lot more freedom to try to apply counter-damage or secure other expansions. I still think nerfing muta regen would be a better change, but a cannon buff could work (depending upon numbers). I disagree with your reasoning. You make it sound like 2 base attacks in PvZ were designed to hinder mutas, this is not true. Accordning to your reasoning the games that P did not push on 2 base the Z would kill P with mutas, this was not the case. P handled mutas just fine in hots without 2 base pushes by utilizing blinkstalkers and Phoenix. Commonly P opened Oracle to have a stargate on hand if P needed to produce Phoenix against mutas. There were never a need to prematurely build Phoenix, it was done reactionary. In late game scenarios P added a second stargate as a safety precausion that weren't used unless Z Went for the muta switch. The two base pushs you describe here sounds like all-in pushes to me, standard two base pressure builds work in lotv but all-ins genereally don't for two reasons that you stated. - Ravagers and their ability to crush FF. - The bases run out of minerals and thus the all-in fails. Regarding lings being cheap and giving fast map-control, this is not unique to lotv, zerg has always had fast and cheap lings since wol. Regarding the economy it does not in fact effect muta builds the way that you describe, the economy does not give faster income rate to zerg (compared to terran and protoss). The races are still balanced in that regard, at least the zerg is not favored. The main reason you don't see protoss being as aggresive in PvZ anymore is because with lotv the macro edge has passed from Z to P. In hots zerg were the macro race, they were the race that could use their defensive advantage to be greedy and get an edge in a macro game. In hots zerg all-ins and pressure builds were rare, instead we got the 3 hatch before pool build. In lotv its actually the protoss that has the strong defensive advantage and the macro edge. In P knows that they can be ahead by macroing why would they pressure or all-in? They don't atm because the meta is currently that P has the advantage in a macro game. Zerg used to need to be ahead a whole base with saturation,, that happens very rarely nowadays. You can argue that it is balanced out since Z has gotten new units that are more cost efficient and that would be partly true. Zerg is more cost efficient atm but their macro position has worsened more than their efficiency has improved. Its not that 2 base pressure builds do not work, it is that protoss have no reason to properly explore those builds atm. The reason that mutas came slower or in smaller chunks during hots was because the protoss was pressuring, as you say. Through attacking and scouting they found out what was happening and had time to prepare. I think its rediculous that protoss think that they are supposed to go "fast third nexus, double robo immortal with double forge".... "oh no, he has 20 mutas, obviously I am supposed to be able to defend against these without scouting or actually doing anything else out on the map!!! Yeah, lets buff the the PC so absolutely nothing can kill me while going all out greed with Tech and upgrades!" Seriously, if you are going quick third base no pressure into rouble robo with forge and expect to be safe from all Z openings without scouting properly something is wrong. I think that the way P plays the game atm is not good. I don't Believe that P have to get ahead in macro to have a change against Z but if its true then lurker and possibly ultralisk needs to get nerfed. Its the builds that P goes for that is the problem, not mutas or anything else. P builds adepts and immortals and for some reason those two units are weak against mutas... You guys are both wrong. It's very simple really. Stalkers + sentries countered every unit in hots. However in Lotv, Stalkers get shut down so hard by lurkers it's silly. So you don't see stalker based compositions anymore in every single game. That makes mutalisk more attractive because in a lot of games anti air will be limited. Which in turn gets nullified by protoss opening with lots of phoenix. I don't really get where you are coming from. Blinkstalkers alone(or with sentries) were very rarely a late game composition. Colossus ruled PvZ in hots. Mass stalkers have never been the late game go-to composition, they have Always been a stepping stone and they still are. Even if zerg gets lurkers (which is mid-late game) blinkstalkers can stall for time and transition. Ofc stalkers are not core every single game with adepts in the game and immortal being so powerful, this is exactly what I've been saying -_-
Comedy has it totally right.
In HotS PvZ protoss stayed on stalker/sentry based compositions for a long time. Like 3 bases 66probes 8gate long. Why? Because that comp could deal with ling/roach/hydra well enough AND could also deal with muta switches by pressuring/allining zerg of 8-10 gates mass stalker/sentry (ask Lilbow how he has won all his PvZ ever.)
Ofc if game went longer then transition would occur -> templar or colo (where colo went out of use because of more common vipers).
Fastforward to LotV and stalker/sentry army is not viable vs zerg becuase of combination of:
- introduction Ravagers and lurkers
- changes to economy
- changes to chronoboost
|
On April 19 2016 04:16 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:13 Couguar wrote:
not cannons, stalkers pls. but this is right direction - less mutalisk switch power but what would the buff to stalkers be ? They already have +armored air damage which is pretty essential in fending off drops vT. Though if their anti air was changed to be +light while still doing its current damage to armored it would be an interesting move -diminishing the strenght of stargate in PvP and allowing to play blink vs mutas.
It's simple, Stalkers shouldn't have bonus damage vs Air. They should have 14 dmg vs light and armored air. This change is soooooo long overdue. Blizzard refusing to patch Stalker AA damage has made stupid bandaid solutions (Anion Pulse-Crystals...) necessary.
|
On April 19 2016 19:08 Salteador Neo wrote:Pretty much everyone agrees most air units are too strong and harassment should not be so easy. I would remove muta health regen, nerf the oracle speed and ranged prism pickup. Lower the turbo speed duration of medivacs (or remove it) and nerf phoenix speed. And ofc nerf the liberator AG range and AA damage
All of this are HotS sins which I hope one day will be fixed. The unholy muta/medivac/stargate trinity
|
On April 19 2016 05:57 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:56 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 04:52 blade55555 wrote:On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). lol what? You remove Muta regen Mutalisks are going to suck in all match ups. I also don't think it's a "horrible" bandaid solution. Although I think Stalkers should get an AA buff instead of cannons. mutas were 100% fine in WoL and all the things that make you say that mutas would suck in all mus if muta regen was removed were introduced because of muta regen. The only part I agree with is stalkers should get the buff instead of cannons, stalkers are already pretty rare in the mu nowadays (keep the anti ground as it is and make the anti air 14 + something vs light so that the stalker is still as effective vs drops or void rays). ALL Protoss units regen their shield twice faster than mutalisk ! Medivac heals bio 9 times faster than mutalisk ! And VCS can repair any mecanical units faster than mutas regen ! It's just anti-Zerg bias claming mutas regen is OP, but medivac/shield regen are fine... P/T have massive anti-air AOE with WM, Thor, liberators, storm, archons, while Mutas are much more expensive than this units ! 3 mutas more expensive than a thor, 2 mutas more than one liberator or a HT. But you want 1 shot of thor/liberator or a storm will make useless a 10-20 mutas than cost 1000/1000-2000/2000 ! It's just pure whine and anti-Zerg bias rather than a serious demand.
calling people bias and whine, when you are whining about the other races, yeah right.
all protoss units has shield to hp in the ratio of 1:2. When Protoss units take real damage, it cannot heal up to 100% like mutas.
And good luck of hitting those mutas with your storms and archons, and also thors.
|
On April 19 2016 10:02 tokinho wrote:Does anyone else think it is one of the dumbest ideas, and that this suggestion came from a guy who has never ever ranked and is completely garbage as a player? SourcePlayer profile from the link. He has 210 total career games, never been ranked in 1v1 or teams. THE "COMMUNITY" IDEA IS FROM SOMEONE WHO HAS NEVER PLAYED LADDER.
I don't like the idea either, but his guy might have 10k games in a different region. Since EU feedback was always missed/ignored, even years ago quite a few EU players made accounts on the NA server to take part in the discussion. Not sure this has changed.
|
On April 19 2016 09:01 Shuffleblade wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:20 Gwavajuice wrote:On April 19 2016 04:01 RoomOfMush wrote:
I also want to throw in that I am not a fan of muta regeneration (or super high in general).
ATTENTION! THIS IS OVERSIMPLIFIED:
The reason is it takes strategy out of the game. With regular units you have to calculate whether an attack is worth it or not. You are trading muta hitpoints for damage dealt to enemy economy. Muta hitpoints correspond to spent resources and time.
The question always is: Is it worth to kill X workers if I take Y damage?
But with super high regeneration you dont lose anything. Attacking is the default option and there is no thinking process. Every time you are not attacking (other then to regen) you are losing value. I'm not sure I agree with you here, cause all in all this whole reasoning could be done with spore crawlers and their buff vs Bio worked very well : it countered the mass Muta vs mass Muta meta and didn't change anything else in the game. Photo canon buff could do the same. Moreover, that way Muta keep their power in open battles where they a cool tool for zerg but far from being OP. On April 19 2016 03:50 Shuffleblade wrote:
Erm mutas already have a niche and rare spot in ZvP as it stands. Protoss have gotten just more and more effective ways to deal with them, nerfing them even more in the matchup seems unjustified to me.
Btw I find it hilarious that they think cannon buff is going to help against mass muta switches.... Thats just stupid, even if the P builds 6 cannons at each base 40 mutas roflstomp it, probably not losing a single one unless the cannons are lucky with their shots or the cannons are very close together. That would not effect the matchup much besides making it even more stupid to open muta in zvp and overlord drops would also be easier to defend.
Protoss does not need stronger defense, come on. 1- show me how they deal with them without massing phoenixes? the whole point of the debate is about allowing Protosses to stop using phoenix in every PvZ, FYI. 2 - that's not true, just look how spore crawler buff changed ZvZ. 1.The entirely of hots P handled mutas without "massing phoenix", how did lotv buff mutas so hard that every protoss have to blind counter them now?
Of all the eco busters Chrono was nerfed the hardest. It is hardly noticeable now and what is even more important, it CAN'T stack!
In HotS you could save chrono just in case Zerg did a sudden tech switch. In the case of Mutas, you could have 2-3 Nexi with 2 chronos each, which you could use to boost Stargates like mad. You can't do that now, which makes reactionary play much, much worse. You have to blind counter Mutas, because in too many cases you can't get enough Pheonixes in time with the current Chrono. By the time you get like 4-6 Pheonixes Zerg already has like 30 Mutas...
|
Muta regen should just be like half of what it is and it will all be good.
i mean. the jump was
0.2734 (WoL)
1 (HotS)/(LotV) in blizzard seconds.
|
On April 19 2016 05:57 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:56 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 04:52 blade55555 wrote:On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). lol what? You remove Muta regen Mutalisks are going to suck in all match ups. I also don't think it's a "horrible" bandaid solution. Although I think Stalkers should get an AA buff instead of cannons. mutas were 100% fine in WoL and all the things that make you say that mutas would suck in all mus if muta regen was removed were introduced because of muta regen. The only part I agree with is stalkers should get the buff instead of cannons, stalkers are already pretty rare in the mu nowadays (keep the anti ground as it is and make the anti air 14 + something vs light so that the stalker is still as effective vs drops or void rays). ALL Protoss units regen their shield twice faster than mutalisk ! Medivac heals bio 9 times faster than mutalisk ! And VCS can repair any mecanical units faster than mutas regen ! It's just anti-Zerg bias claming mutas regen is OP, but medivac/shield regen are fine... P/T have massive anti-air AOE with WM, Thor, liberators, storm, archons, while Mutas are much more expensive than this units ! 3 mutas more expensive than a thor, 2 mutas more than one liberator or a HT. But you want 1 shot of thor/liberator or a storm will make useless a 10-20 mutas than cost 1000/1000-2000/2000 ! It's just pure whine and anti-Zerg bias rather than a serious demand.
What? Of all the units you listed, the WM is the only unit that is cheaper than a Muta....I sense a disconnect with this person and reality. Also are you completely forgetting that the mutas has splash damage itself? That is pretty heavy handed to complain about splash damage on Mutas but neglect the fact Mutas have splash damage themselves.
In addition, your Mutas are not useless if they get hit by these units. I suggest going back to WoL vods and watching muta play. Nearly all of these units existed back then and very few people thought Mutas were useless (pre-regen).
P.S. Shields are only half the Protoss health. The base health doesn't regen. Which by the way sucks in terms of upgrades, as the armor upgrades only improve half of the units health.
But here's the true problem:.A Zerg player can go mass Mutas and trade favorably against mass Stalker in a straight up fight (no lings). That is an imbalance. The Stalker, the alternative to the Phoenix, loses to Mutas across the board in nearly every criteria. The Mutalisk is a harassment unit. It should not trade favorably in straight up fights w/o support. Period. Yet it does. And that is not even factoring in Muta regen.
See the problem now?
|
On April 19 2016 19:30 egrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 18:55 Shuffleblade wrote:On April 19 2016 17:47 Comedy wrote:On April 19 2016 17:36 Shuffleblade wrote:On April 19 2016 09:38 Edowyth wrote:On April 19 2016 09:01 Shuffleblade wrote:
1.The entirely of hots P handled mutas without "massing phoenix", how did lotv buff mutas so hard that every protoss have to blind counter them now? 2-base pushes (which the Protoss did quite a bit versus Zerg in HotS) were intended to force the Zerg to invest gas into units to defend (which weakened any possible Muta switch by pre-emptively forcing the use of the gas). These kinds of 2-base pushes don't work in LotV mainly due to a few things: - Speedlings are cheap and give very fast map-control to the Zerg. They can see any Protoss ground force coming and build units as the forces move across the map. - Ravagers mean that forcefields are much less powerful. - 12-worker start gives faster access to a higher income-rate (which is the main thing required for a mutalisk switch, banked resources) - Fewer resources per base lessens the power of 2-base pushes (esp the low-value minerals which mine out super-fast, taking the wind out of all possible reinforcements to keep up pressure or try to fall back while securing a third) Not all of these things are bad. All of them do, however, contribute to the much faster capability (relatively) to tech-switch into mutalisks. Protoss, on the other hand, still has to have a mass of resources devoted into getting two stargates, production time, and investment into Phoenixes to be able to counter Mutalisks. Protoss' primary investment against a mutalisk switch is time for infrastructure.In HotS, this was more easily possible because (1) the Zerg had less gas due to the Protoss' pressure, (2) if in a really-tight spot, you could fall back to 2-base and still mine somewhat efficiently for a short time, (3) due to (1) the Mutalisks appeared in dribbles and drabs ... you could see the tech switch coming and prepare with a little bit of lee-way before there were 20+ Mutas eating probes. On April 19 2016 09:01 Shuffleblade wrote:
2. Dude, the spore crawler change didn't change late game 40 mutas scenario. And that's all Protoss needs too. A better delaying tactic, so that the initial 15 or so mutas easily possible with LotV (or even 20+) can be staved off with existing forces (archons? stalkers? a couple of chrono-boosted phoenix?) and defenses which are slightly-more effective instead of simply dying to the switch. The spore buff helps in 40-muta switches too. With a little splash (fungal ... storm), and a few defenses (spores ... cannons) mutas can be effectively reduced in number to a force you can mop-up -- which allows your army a lot more freedom to try to apply counter-damage or secure other expansions. I still think nerfing muta regen would be a better change, but a cannon buff could work (depending upon numbers). I disagree with your reasoning. You make it sound like 2 base attacks in PvZ were designed to hinder mutas, this is not true. Accordning to your reasoning the games that P did not push on 2 base the Z would kill P with mutas, this was not the case. P handled mutas just fine in hots without 2 base pushes by utilizing blinkstalkers and Phoenix. Commonly P opened Oracle to have a stargate on hand if P needed to produce Phoenix against mutas. There were never a need to prematurely build Phoenix, it was done reactionary. In late game scenarios P added a second stargate as a safety precausion that weren't used unless Z Went for the muta switch. The two base pushs you describe here sounds like all-in pushes to me, standard two base pressure builds work in lotv but all-ins genereally don't for two reasons that you stated. - Ravagers and their ability to crush FF. - The bases run out of minerals and thus the all-in fails. Regarding lings being cheap and giving fast map-control, this is not unique to lotv, zerg has always had fast and cheap lings since wol. Regarding the economy it does not in fact effect muta builds the way that you describe, the economy does not give faster income rate to zerg (compared to terran and protoss). The races are still balanced in that regard, at least the zerg is not favored. The main reason you don't see protoss being as aggresive in PvZ anymore is because with lotv the macro edge has passed from Z to P. In hots zerg were the macro race, they were the race that could use their defensive advantage to be greedy and get an edge in a macro game. In hots zerg all-ins and pressure builds were rare, instead we got the 3 hatch before pool build. In lotv its actually the protoss that has the strong defensive advantage and the macro edge. In P knows that they can be ahead by macroing why would they pressure or all-in? They don't atm because the meta is currently that P has the advantage in a macro game. Zerg used to need to be ahead a whole base with saturation,, that happens very rarely nowadays. You can argue that it is balanced out since Z has gotten new units that are more cost efficient and that would be partly true. Zerg is more cost efficient atm but their macro position has worsened more than their efficiency has improved. Its not that 2 base pressure builds do not work, it is that protoss have no reason to properly explore those builds atm. The reason that mutas came slower or in smaller chunks during hots was because the protoss was pressuring, as you say. Through attacking and scouting they found out what was happening and had time to prepare. I think its rediculous that protoss think that they are supposed to go "fast third nexus, double robo immortal with double forge".... "oh no, he has 20 mutas, obviously I am supposed to be able to defend against these without scouting or actually doing anything else out on the map!!! Yeah, lets buff the the PC so absolutely nothing can kill me while going all out greed with Tech and upgrades!" Seriously, if you are going quick third base no pressure into rouble robo with forge and expect to be safe from all Z openings without scouting properly something is wrong. I think that the way P plays the game atm is not good. I don't Believe that P have to get ahead in macro to have a change against Z but if its true then lurker and possibly ultralisk needs to get nerfed. Its the builds that P goes for that is the problem, not mutas or anything else. P builds adepts and immortals and for some reason those two units are weak against mutas... You guys are both wrong. It's very simple really. Stalkers + sentries countered every unit in hots. However in Lotv, Stalkers get shut down so hard by lurkers it's silly. So you don't see stalker based compositions anymore in every single game. That makes mutalisk more attractive because in a lot of games anti air will be limited. Which in turn gets nullified by protoss opening with lots of phoenix. I don't really get where you are coming from. Blinkstalkers alone(or with sentries) were very rarely a late game composition. Colossus ruled PvZ in hots. Mass stalkers have never been the late game go-to composition, they have Always been a stepping stone and they still are. Even if zerg gets lurkers (which is mid-late game) blinkstalkers can stall for time and transition. Ofc stalkers are not core every single game with adepts in the game and immortal being so powerful, this is exactly what I've been saying -_- Comedy has it totally right. In HotS PvZ protoss stayed on stalker/sentry based compositions for a long time. Like 3 bases 66probes 8gate long. Why? Because that comp could deal with ling/roach/hydra well enough AND could also deal with muta switches by pressuring/allining zerg of 8-10 gates mass stalker/sentry (ask Lilbow how he has won all his PvZ ever.) Ofc if game went longer then transition would occur -> templar or colo (where colo went out of use because of more common vipers). Fastforward to LotV and stalker/sentry army is not viable vs zerg becuase of combination of: - introduction Ravagers and lurkers - changes to economy - changes to chronoboost
Yep, this compo (stalkers blink/sentry) was responding very effectively to any agression that the zergs can pull off in the mid game and had an invicible late game after the nerf of the SH, I really fell it was a great imbalance but almost no one complain about it so I can be wrong but it seems there is a lot of protoss biais in TL, I mean, toss were whining a LOT even before Lotv was released or even the meta was stable...
Right now, the centry are almost useless against the ravagers (making Ling/bane viable in the MU!) and so, the efficienty of stalker blink drop off. Moreover, as it has been said, the lurker is a very good counter to blink stalker and must be counter with Immortal/archon/chargelot in addition of stalker blink which makes the muta switch viable without pheonix however such a compo should totally destroy the zerg ground army and the bases while a defense can be done on one protoss base with MSC/pylone canon and some warp of archon, in the current state of the game, I don't feel like trade base are an automatically loss for the toss but I guess I can be wrong.
However, I am pretty sure that Pheonix are not mainly used to prevent such a switch, the pylone defense, the mass archon are pretty standarts right now and in mid game, this is pretty hard to pull off such a strat as a zerg unless you have a massive lead. From my perspective, Pheonix are used because:
_ It counters the drop in early game
_ It can be easely produced and is a very effective harass tool
_ The push of the zerg in the B3 or the b4 is defended with the help of the pylone canons but the retreat of the zerg unit are nullify with the lift of the pheonix which is extremely efficient.
_ It zones the zerg army consistently and a good toss will have a very good view of what's going on on the zerg base during the first harass sequences in which the loss of a pheonix is only dependant of the protoss skill and not the zerg. (it's the reason why I will always prefer the harass Tools of Terran which involve micro from both side that this sort of harass who depend of only one player and not the other, I know people think that the pheonix is the best designed harass unit the seriously, this is the worst and by a large margin!)
So I am really skeptical concerning the position of Harstem and Huk despite their pro statut.
I rarely see big muta switch in pro match or pro stream and, it is rarely effective except maybe when the zerg can afford viper but this is such a heavy investisment in gaz.
To conlude, my two cents:
1) The opening pheonix are good to counter a muta opening or even a muta switch but this is not the primary reason of their use, so I am pretty sure that this canon buff won't resolve the problem of the opening of the toss. The pheonix compo will still be almost a must-have in the MU despite a nerf of the mutas ball because it has a great diversity of use who counters a lot more zerg strategy than just the mutas based compo.
2) I am not sure that mutas switch are not the reason of an imbalance in the MU and even in term of design, I fail to see it as a main problem in the MU. (ravagers and tempest seem a way bigger concern for the state of the mu but when I read that DK considers a SH buff, I guess there is not hope to have)
|
On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc).
I don't disagree but then you must ask why were mutalisks given regen in the first place?
Let me give the answer: Without muta regen Z was unable to build anything in that playstyle that can overcome t1 unit spamming of terran. Lings and baleings are just cannon fodder and usually die in fights, mutas were too before they had regen.
|
On April 19 2016 21:19 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). I don't disagree but then you must ask why were mutalisks given regen in the first place?
because micro. Unfortunately fast regeneration also leads to snowball.
|
Because in WoL a single thor would splash the mutas and there wouldn't be any harrass from mutas for the next minute or two.
|
Oh yissss... Another balance fixing band aid... Let's not look into design people, nothing to see here.
|
On April 19 2016 10:02 tokinho wrote:Does anyone else think it is one of the dumbest ideas, and that this suggestion came from a guy who has never ever ranked and is completely garbage as a player? SourcePlayer profile from the link. He has 210 total career games, never been ranked in 1v1 or teams. THE "COMMUNITY" IDEA IS FROM SOMEONE WHO HAS NEVER PLAYED LADDER.
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/Xtc5hGz.png)
|
On April 19 2016 20:19 Sweetness.751 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 05:57 Tyrhanius wrote:On April 19 2016 04:56 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 04:52 blade55555 wrote:On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). lol what? You remove Muta regen Mutalisks are going to suck in all match ups. I also don't think it's a "horrible" bandaid solution. Although I think Stalkers should get an AA buff instead of cannons. mutas were 100% fine in WoL and all the things that make you say that mutas would suck in all mus if muta regen was removed were introduced because of muta regen. The only part I agree with is stalkers should get the buff instead of cannons, stalkers are already pretty rare in the mu nowadays (keep the anti ground as it is and make the anti air 14 + something vs light so that the stalker is still as effective vs drops or void rays). ALL Protoss units regen their shield twice faster than mutalisk ! Medivac heals bio 9 times faster than mutalisk ! And VCS can repair any mecanical units faster than mutas regen ! It's just anti-Zerg bias claming mutas regen is OP, but medivac/shield regen are fine... P/T have massive anti-air AOE with WM, Thor, liberators, storm, archons, while Mutas are much more expensive than this units ! 3 mutas more expensive than a thor, 2 mutas more than one liberator or a HT. But you want 1 shot of thor/liberator or a storm will make useless a 10-20 mutas than cost 1000/1000-2000/2000 ! It's just pure whine and anti-Zerg bias rather than a serious demand. But here's the true problem:.A Zerg player can go mass Mutas and trade favorably against mass Stalker in a straight up fight (no lings). That is an imbalance. The Stalker, the alternative to the Phoenix, loses to Mutas across the board in nearly every criteria. The Mutalisk is a harassment unit. It should not trade favorably in straight up fights w/o support. Period. Yet it does. And that is not even factoring in Muta regen. See the problem now?
So the problem is that in straigh up engagement, stalkers lose against Mutas? I disagree:
1) With good micro, except if the engagement is in a narrow space, blink stalkers should win just because they have better ups than the muta
2) They are cheaper than the mutas which are T2 unit coming after a long tech (spire...) and can be cost efficient only when they are 10 at the very least so it is not like the zerg pop out a mutas ball easely
3) Stalkers is designed as a very versatile unit so they are not a hardcounter to muta but a softcounter which can be efficient with good micro or support units (sentry, archon, phoenix)
4) Finally, talking about balance with just an unit vs unit example has never been meaningful, the AA zerg unit, the corrupter gets rekt by void ray, skytoss, blabla. (even if skytoss could be op, this argument would still be invalid)
So maybe mutas regenerate too much but their overall stats are correct, I do not see a problem in this aspect.
|
On April 19 2016 04:56 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:52 blade55555 wrote:On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). lol what? You remove Muta regen Mutalisks are going to suck in all match ups. I also don't think it's a "horrible" bandaid solution. Although I think Stalkers should get an AA buff instead of cannons. mutas were 100% fine in WoL and all the things that make you say that mutas would suck in all mus if muta regen was removed were introduced because of muta regen. The only part I agree with is stalkers should get the buff instead of cannons, stalkers are already pretty rare in the mu nowadays (keep the anti ground as it is and make the anti air 14 + something vs light so that the stalker is still as effective vs drops or void rays).
Agreed. Muta regen made the matchup way less diverse/fun. A zerg should be punished for getting all his mutas stormed but 30 seconds later they're all full hp again. You have to wipe them out, getting the stack low does very little. The regen basically forces toss to have a standing phoenix army as templar/stalker/static d just doesn't cut it against a decent switch.
|
AFAIK mute regen was added in HotS directly because of MMMM reigning supreme in TvZ. The idea was that WM splash hits mutas to hard so instead of idk changing the splash or making WM do not hit air, they decided to add fast regen to mutmut so they can participate in fight more frequently.
|
On April 19 2016 23:22 egrimm wrote:
AFAIK mute regen was added in HotS directly because of MMMM reigning supreme in TvZ. The idea was that WM splash hits mutas to hard so instead of idk changing the splash or making WM do not hit air, they decided to add fast regen to mutmut so they can participate in fight more frequently.
Wasn't it added at the start of HotS, at the same time the WM was introduced?
I always assumed they added it because they could and it was "creative" lol. Same reason for turbovac, altho you could argue it was to "add more flashy micro opportunities" for that one I guess.
Whatever were the reasons, the cons outweigh the pros. Phoenix needed to get a buff so big that it became the most clear hardcounter in sc2, to make mutas fair in PvZ.
Edit: Rereading your reasoning, it does makes sense. I also agree with you that they could have changed the WM instead ofc.
|
On April 19 2016 23:22 egrimm wrote:
AFAIK mute regen was added in HotS directly because of MMMM reigning supreme in TvZ. The idea was that WM splash hits mutas to hard so instead of idk changing the splash or making WM do not hit air, they decided to add fast regen to mutmut so they can participate in fight more frequently.
Considering that MMMM vs MLB was the best meta ever to play and to watch with high control micro/macro from both sides at any stage of the game, I feel like it was a very good idea but currently, I don't know.
If they remove the tankivac, nerf the ravagers, the ultras and buff a bit the mine (which I hope), tvz will be solved but zvp... Well, this MU has always caused the most rage and frustration, the situation is not better or worse than before.
|
On April 19 2016 23:33 stilt wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 23:22 egrimm wrote:
AFAIK mute regen was added in HotS directly because of MMMM reigning supreme in TvZ. The idea was that WM splash hits mutas to hard so instead of idk changing the splash or making WM do not hit air, they decided to add fast regen to mutmut so they can participate in fight more frequently. Considering that MMMM vs MLB was the best meta ever to play and to watch with high control micro/macro from both sides at any stage of the game, I feel like it was a very good idea but currently, I don't know. If they remove the tankivac, nerf the ravagers, the ultras and buff a bit the mine (which I hope), tvz will be solved but zvp... Well, this MU has always caused the most rage and frustration, the situation is not better or worse than before.
Well while I agree that MMMM vs MLB was exciting and might be best meta for TvZ I still think that WM hitting both ground and air didn't make much sense. However it was needed because of oracle rushes. If the oracle rushes were nerfed then I firmly believe that cheaper (both resources and supply wise) WM but without ability to hit air would be much much better for the game. Then no muta regen would be needed -> no range buff to phoenixes etc.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On April 19 2016 22:28 stilt wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 20:19 Sweetness.751 wrote:On April 19 2016 05:57 Tyrhanius wrote:On April 19 2016 04:56 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 04:52 blade55555 wrote:On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). lol what? You remove Muta regen Mutalisks are going to suck in all match ups. I also don't think it's a "horrible" bandaid solution. Although I think Stalkers should get an AA buff instead of cannons. mutas were 100% fine in WoL and all the things that make you say that mutas would suck in all mus if muta regen was removed were introduced because of muta regen. The only part I agree with is stalkers should get the buff instead of cannons, stalkers are already pretty rare in the mu nowadays (keep the anti ground as it is and make the anti air 14 + something vs light so that the stalker is still as effective vs drops or void rays). ALL Protoss units regen their shield twice faster than mutalisk ! Medivac heals bio 9 times faster than mutalisk ! And VCS can repair any mecanical units faster than mutas regen ! It's just anti-Zerg bias claming mutas regen is OP, but medivac/shield regen are fine... P/T have massive anti-air AOE with WM, Thor, liberators, storm, archons, while Mutas are much more expensive than this units ! 3 mutas more expensive than a thor, 2 mutas more than one liberator or a HT. But you want 1 shot of thor/liberator or a storm will make useless a 10-20 mutas than cost 1000/1000-2000/2000 ! It's just pure whine and anti-Zerg bias rather than a serious demand. But here's the true problem:.A Zerg player can go mass Mutas and trade favorably against mass Stalker in a straight up fight (no lings). That is an imbalance. The Stalker, the alternative to the Phoenix, loses to Mutas across the board in nearly every criteria. The Mutalisk is a harassment unit. It should not trade favorably in straight up fights w/o support. Period. Yet it does. And that is not even factoring in Muta regen. See the problem now? So the problem is that in straigh up engagement, stalkers lose against Mutas? I disagree: 1) With good micro, except if the engagement is in a narrow space, blink stalkers should win just because they have better ups than the muta 2) They are cheaper than the mutas which are T2 unit coming after a long tech (spire...) and can be cost efficient only when they are 10 at the very least so it is not like the zerg pop out a mutas ball easely 3) Stalkers is designed as a very versatile unit so they are not a hardcounter to muta but a softcounter which can be efficient with good micro or support units (sentry, archon, phoenix) 4) Finally, talking about balance with just an unit vs unit example has never been meaningful, the AA zerg unit, the corrupter gets rekt by void ray, skytoss, blabla. (even if skytoss could be op, this argument would still be invalid) So maybe mutas regenerate too much but their overall stats are correct, I do not see a problem in this aspect.
In mass vs. mass games stalkers lose not because of their damage but because their shooting range and muta clamping. But why on Earth would someone engaged stalkers with a guardian shield? Better is to fly around and use immobility of stalkers. YES, you read correctly, stalkers are immobile when talking stalkers vs. mutalisks. That's why Protoss needs a helping hand.
|
On April 19 2016 23:28 Salteador Neo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 23:22 egrimm wrote:
AFAIK mute regen was added in HotS directly because of MMMM reigning supreme in TvZ. The idea was that WM splash hits mutas to hard so instead of idk changing the splash or making WM do not hit air, they decided to add fast regen to mutmut so they can participate in fight more frequently. Wasn't it added at the start of HotS, at the same time the WM was introduced?
accoridng to this topic: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2-hots/387767-beta-balance-update-9
It was still beta but more like end of it. 3 months later the game was released.
|
On April 19 2016 23:52 egrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 23:28 Salteador Neo wrote:On April 19 2016 23:22 egrimm wrote:
AFAIK mute regen was added in HotS directly because of MMMM reigning supreme in TvZ. The idea was that WM splash hits mutas to hard so instead of idk changing the splash or making WM do not hit air, they decided to add fast regen to mutmut so they can participate in fight more frequently. Wasn't it added at the start of HotS, at the same time the WM was introduced? accoridng to this topic: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2-hots/387767-beta-balance-update-9It was still beta but more like end of it. 3 months later the game was released.
Love how the first two posts on that thread hit the nail on both the muta buff and the widow mine :D
"Cyro: A bit wary of more muta buffs (1.38hp per real second wowza)"
"blade55555: If they want mutas to be used in zvt they need to make it so widows can't hit air or it can't hit mutas at least -_-"
|
On April 19 2016 23:43 egrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 23:33 stilt wrote:On April 19 2016 23:22 egrimm wrote:
AFAIK mute regen was added in HotS directly because of MMMM reigning supreme in TvZ. The idea was that WM splash hits mutas to hard so instead of idk changing the splash or making WM do not hit air, they decided to add fast regen to mutmut so they can participate in fight more frequently. Considering that MMMM vs MLB was the best meta ever to play and to watch with high control micro/macro from both sides at any stage of the game, I feel like it was a very good idea but currently, I don't know. If they remove the tankivac, nerf the ravagers, the ultras and buff a bit the mine (which I hope), tvz will be solved but zvp... Well, this MU has always caused the most rage and frustration, the situation is not better or worse than before. Well while I agree that MMMM vs MLB was exciting and might be best meta for TvZ I still think that WM hitting both ground and air didn't make much sense. However it was needed because of oracle rushes. If the oracle rushes were nerfed then I firmly believe that cheaper (both resources and supply wise) WM but without ability to hit air would be much much better for the game. Then no muta regen would be needed -> no range buff to phoenixes etc.
I agree that the AA of WM was a bit awkward however without this ability, it would have not fix at all the muta ball problem they were already in WOL even without the muta/regen and speed.
In parallel, I think that the medivacs boost could have been too strong in this situation while with this muta buff, I feel like it was a good addition.
|
On April 19 2016 23:59 Salteador Neo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 23:52 egrimm wrote:On April 19 2016 23:28 Salteador Neo wrote:On April 19 2016 23:22 egrimm wrote:
AFAIK mute regen was added in HotS directly because of MMMM reigning supreme in TvZ. The idea was that WM splash hits mutas to hard so instead of idk changing the splash or making WM do not hit air, they decided to add fast regen to mutmut so they can participate in fight more frequently. Wasn't it added at the start of HotS, at the same time the WM was introduced? accoridng to this topic: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2-hots/387767-beta-balance-update-9It was still beta but more like end of it. 3 months later the game was released. Love how the first two posts on that thread hit the nail on both the muta buff and the widow mine :D "Cyro: A bit wary of more muta buffs (1.38hp per real second wowza)" "blade55555: If they want mutas to be used in zvt they need to make it so widows can't hit air or it can't hit mutas at least -_-"
haha yeah exaclty As we can clearly see it is not like nobody could predict the outcome of these changes 
Additionally we can even say which races they do play based on their legitimate fears
|
On April 20 2016 00:01 stilt wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 23:43 egrimm wrote:On April 19 2016 23:33 stilt wrote:On April 19 2016 23:22 egrimm wrote:
AFAIK mute regen was added in HotS directly because of MMMM reigning supreme in TvZ. The idea was that WM splash hits mutas to hard so instead of idk changing the splash or making WM do not hit air, they decided to add fast regen to mutmut so they can participate in fight more frequently. Considering that MMMM vs MLB was the best meta ever to play and to watch with high control micro/macro from both sides at any stage of the game, I feel like it was a very good idea but currently, I don't know. If they remove the tankivac, nerf the ravagers, the ultras and buff a bit the mine (which I hope), tvz will be solved but zvp... Well, this MU has always caused the most rage and frustration, the situation is not better or worse than before. Well while I agree that MMMM vs MLB was exciting and might be best meta for TvZ I still think that WM hitting both ground and air didn't make much sense. However it was needed because of oracle rushes. If the oracle rushes were nerfed then I firmly believe that cheaper (both resources and supply wise) WM but without ability to hit air would be much much better for the game. Then no muta regen would be needed -> no range buff to phoenixes etc. I agree that the AA of WM was a bit awkward however without this ability, it would have not fix at all the muta ball problem they were already in WOL even without the muta/regen and speed. In parallel, I think that the medivacs boost could have been too strong in this situation while with this muta buff, I feel like it was a good addition.
Idk, in WoL TvZ seemed fine except of BL/infestor ofc. It is ancient history now though so I cannot say for sure
imho marines + thors + would be sufficient to deal with pre-buff mutas when accompanied with tanks/WM for ground support against ling/banes.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
On April 20 2016 00:02 egrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 23:59 Salteador Neo wrote:On April 19 2016 23:52 egrimm wrote:On April 19 2016 23:28 Salteador Neo wrote:On April 19 2016 23:22 egrimm wrote:
AFAIK mute regen was added in HotS directly because of MMMM reigning supreme in TvZ. The idea was that WM splash hits mutas to hard so instead of idk changing the splash or making WM do not hit air, they decided to add fast regen to mutmut so they can participate in fight more frequently. Wasn't it added at the start of HotS, at the same time the WM was introduced? accoridng to this topic: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2-hots/387767-beta-balance-update-9It was still beta but more like end of it. 3 months later the game was released. Love how the first two posts on that thread hit the nail on both the muta buff and the widow mine :D "Cyro: A bit wary of more muta buffs (1.38hp per real second wowza)" "blade55555: If they want mutas to be used in zvt they need to make it so widows can't hit air or it can't hit mutas at least -_-" haha yeah exaclty As we can clearly see it is not like nobody could predict the outcome of these changes Additionally we can even say which races they do play based on their legitimate fears
Hahaha it's a bit weird getting quoted 3 and a half years later
|
On April 20 2016 00:05 egrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2016 00:01 stilt wrote:On April 19 2016 23:43 egrimm wrote:On April 19 2016 23:33 stilt wrote:On April 19 2016 23:22 egrimm wrote:
AFAIK mute regen was added in HotS directly because of MMMM reigning supreme in TvZ. The idea was that WM splash hits mutas to hard so instead of idk changing the splash or making WM do not hit air, they decided to add fast regen to mutmut so they can participate in fight more frequently. Considering that MMMM vs MLB was the best meta ever to play and to watch with high control micro/macro from both sides at any stage of the game, I feel like it was a very good idea but currently, I don't know. If they remove the tankivac, nerf the ravagers, the ultras and buff a bit the mine (which I hope), tvz will be solved but zvp... Well, this MU has always caused the most rage and frustration, the situation is not better or worse than before. Well while I agree that MMMM vs MLB was exciting and might be best meta for TvZ I still think that WM hitting both ground and air didn't make much sense. However it was needed because of oracle rushes. If the oracle rushes were nerfed then I firmly believe that cheaper (both resources and supply wise) WM but without ability to hit air would be much much better for the game. Then no muta regen would be needed -> no range buff to phoenixes etc. I agree that the AA of WM was a bit awkward however without this ability, it would have not fix at all the muta ball problem they were already in WOL even without the muta/regen and speed. In parallel, I think that the medivacs boost could have been too strong in this situation while with this muta buff, I feel like it was a good addition. Idk, in WoL TvZ seemed fine except of BL/infestor ofc. It is ancient history now though so I cannot say for sure imho marines + thors + would be sufficient to deal with pre-buff mutas when accompanied with tanks/WM for ground support against ling/banes.
TvZ was good even I never really liked the tank and the micro that the zerg must pull off in order to win: focus the tanks with the muta and the bane into the marines, it was not that enjoyable to do and to Watch than the WM stuff however I still remember all the whine on big muta balls in zvt, in term of pure design, I'm pretty sure it was already a concern (at least, it was in PvZ!). And, without buffed mutas and the AA of WM, I think the MU would have been based on tank compo and not WM but here again, we can rewrite history!
|
On April 19 2016 17:36 Shuffleblade wrote:
Its the builds that P goes for that is the problem, not mutas or anything else. P builds adepts and immortals and for some reason those two units are weak against mutas...
Your whole post is based upon some really backwards thinking, not the least is the above.
Protoss players have the greatest incentive to play different builds that everyone else does: winning.
There are obviously your Hases, Stardusts and so on playing SC2. They're just not winning. They're not winning because cheesing is a very, very bad option for Protoss vs Zerg in LotV. What's more, it's not just cheesing that's bad, but 2-base pressure in general (as I pointed out above, though you seemed to miss every single point).
Protoss players aren't all doing the exact same build because it's "too good". They're doing the same build because anything else dies to scouting + muta switches. Even assuming the first were correct, there would still be players doing other things, if for no other reason than the surprise factor allowing them to win versus better opponents. That doesn't happen.
The difference between LotV and HotS for Muta play is this: tech to defeat mutas still takes the same amount of time to get up whereas the resource bank needed to do a muta switch is much faster to achieve due to the new relative safety of zergs in the early-game (barring oracles / phoenix) and the starting workers change.
In HotS, you had a ton of time ... you could do a 2-base pressure (with resources to back it up -- whose point wasn't to prevent mutas, but to economically harm the zerg -- yet the very act of pushing forced resources away from a potential switch, weakening the strategy, allowing more time to react to such a switch), you could go blink (and have time to get cannons up to delay to a stargate switch against mutas because your 2 bases wouldn't run out of resources amassing a defense and [barely] taking a third), you could do tons of things.
In LotV, without a stargate, you have no way to pressure the zerg (allowing them to bank resources faster), you have more starting workers (allowing them to bank resources faster), and you run out of resources faster (on 2-base ... it's nearly impossible to take and defend a third versus a fast muta switch unless you've gone phoenix in LotV because you don't have the resources to do so).
So, your surprise that everyone is opening up to counter mutas (phoenix) should really be leading you to wonder why ... it's because we have to. Literally all that Protoss needs to be able to open anything else is just a tiny amount of time to be able to survive the initial portion of a muta-switch. Not to be invincible. Not to force mutas to always be bad options versus Protoss ... just enough time to be able to start switching to phoenix.
Again, I really dislike the change. I think it's bad overall for the game. I'd much prefer a change to mutas (why have +bio on spores and cannons instead of just nerfing muta regen, the cause for both of these changes). Mutas are absolutely the reason that everyone opens phoenix, however.
|
On April 20 2016 00:18 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2016 00:02 egrimm wrote:On April 19 2016 23:59 Salteador Neo wrote:On April 19 2016 23:52 egrimm wrote:On April 19 2016 23:28 Salteador Neo wrote:On April 19 2016 23:22 egrimm wrote:
AFAIK mute regen was added in HotS directly because of MMMM reigning supreme in TvZ. The idea was that WM splash hits mutas to hard so instead of idk changing the splash or making WM do not hit air, they decided to add fast regen to mutmut so they can participate in fight more frequently. Wasn't it added at the start of HotS, at the same time the WM was introduced? accoridng to this topic: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/starcraft-2-hots/387767-beta-balance-update-9It was still beta but more like end of it. 3 months later the game was released. Love how the first two posts on that thread hit the nail on both the muta buff and the widow mine :D "Cyro: A bit wary of more muta buffs (1.38hp per real second wowza)" "blade55555: If they want mutas to be used in zvt they need to make it so widows can't hit air or it can't hit mutas at least -_-" haha yeah exaclty As we can clearly see it is not like nobody could predict the outcome of these changes Additionally we can even say which races they do play based on their legitimate fears Hahaha it's a bit weird getting quoted 3 and a half years later
So much time, so many good sc memories
|
On April 19 2016 23:49 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 22:28 stilt wrote:On April 19 2016 20:19 Sweetness.751 wrote:On April 19 2016 05:57 Tyrhanius wrote:On April 19 2016 04:56 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 04:52 blade55555 wrote:On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). lol what? You remove Muta regen Mutalisks are going to suck in all match ups. I also don't think it's a "horrible" bandaid solution. Although I think Stalkers should get an AA buff instead of cannons. mutas were 100% fine in WoL and all the things that make you say that mutas would suck in all mus if muta regen was removed were introduced because of muta regen. The only part I agree with is stalkers should get the buff instead of cannons, stalkers are already pretty rare in the mu nowadays (keep the anti ground as it is and make the anti air 14 + something vs light so that the stalker is still as effective vs drops or void rays). ALL Protoss units regen their shield twice faster than mutalisk ! Medivac heals bio 9 times faster than mutalisk ! And VCS can repair any mecanical units faster than mutas regen ! It's just anti-Zerg bias claming mutas regen is OP, but medivac/shield regen are fine... P/T have massive anti-air AOE with WM, Thor, liberators, storm, archons, while Mutas are much more expensive than this units ! 3 mutas more expensive than a thor, 2 mutas more than one liberator or a HT. But you want 1 shot of thor/liberator or a storm will make useless a 10-20 mutas than cost 1000/1000-2000/2000 ! It's just pure whine and anti-Zerg bias rather than a serious demand. But here's the true problem:.A Zerg player can go mass Mutas and trade favorably against mass Stalker in a straight up fight (no lings). That is an imbalance. The Stalker, the alternative to the Phoenix, loses to Mutas across the board in nearly every criteria. The Mutalisk is a harassment unit. It should not trade favorably in straight up fights w/o support. Period. Yet it does. And that is not even factoring in Muta regen. See the problem now? So the problem is that in straigh up engagement, stalkers lose against Mutas? I disagree: 1) With good micro, except if the engagement is in a narrow space, blink stalkers should win just because they have better ups than the muta 2) They are cheaper than the mutas which are T2 unit coming after a long tech (spire...) and can be cost efficient only when they are 10 at the very least so it is not like the zerg pop out a mutas ball easely 3) Stalkers is designed as a very versatile unit so they are not a hardcounter to muta but a softcounter which can be efficient with good micro or support units (sentry, archon, phoenix) 4) Finally, talking about balance with just an unit vs unit example has never been meaningful, the AA zerg unit, the corrupter gets rekt by void ray, skytoss, blabla. (even if skytoss could be op, this argument would still be invalid) So maybe mutas regenerate too much but their overall stats are correct, I do not see a problem in this aspect. In mass vs. mass games stalkers lose not because of their damage but because their shooting range and muta clamping. But why on Earth would someone engaged stalkers with a guardian shield? Better is to fly around and use immobility of stalkers. YES, you read correctly, stalkers are immobile when talking stalkers vs. mutalisks. That's why Protoss needs a helping hand.
Ok so, when your mass of stalkers do not reach the muta because of their lack of rang, it is the fault of a bad engagement in which you're not supposing to profit. And no, stalkers with blink are pretty mobile and with "helping hand" such as Archon/Storm/pheonix in support they can repel efficiently a harass (didn't count the MSC). And once again, mutas are not a cheap investissment, a opening in muta in zvp is pretty riscky against all sort of timing and a muta switch is a gamble which paid off with at least 2000/2000 min and gaz so it is not as if the strat was easy to pull off because a counter Attack would be devastating, this is always a tricky spot, moreover, if the spire is scouted before it ends, it will rarely works, if the first phoenix are well microed, they are really good supporting unit by forcing little engagement of a probably no upgraded muta ball.
Making the stalkers a hardcounter of the mutas will probably solve the muta problem in zvp but will erase a large part of the tactical depht of this MU in a strat which is currently not heavely use in the current meta. (I watched a lot of Stream with TLO, Firecake, True, Snute or the gm commentator Yogo and maybe I didn't watch at the good time but I didn't watch many mutas in zvp even without pheonix)
Edit: I think I can add a point to the use of phoenix, when you want to make a push Hydras/ lurkers, if the guy has 10 phoenix or more, you seriously must balance the proportion nicely because if Something goes wrong, you gave no retreat and the hydras fall rapidly under a lift.
|
This is where the chrono nerf really hurt. In HoTS you could put up a reactionary stargate to mutas, save up chrono, and push out a few phoenixes quick. In LOTV, with chrono being much slower and unable to be banked, you need to have a stargate (preferably 2) already in place by the time you get a hint that mutas are coming.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
The chrono nerf hurt early game too, like pre-warpgate. Your ability to change what you are doing and emphasize units or emphasize warpgates or a few of your first tech unit is hurt, openings generally look more similar to each other.
I'm susprised that warpgate hasn't been reduced in research time by 10 or 15 seconds given the weakness of protoss pre-warpgate. Timing attacks that would hit the exact second that warpgate research finished (to be affected by this change) are weaker than ever against all three races, yet warpgate research is absolutely critical for defensive play. 10 seconds would be felt there.
Excellent post @Edowyth
|
On April 20 2016 00:20 Edowyth wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 17:36 Shuffleblade wrote:
Its the builds that P goes for that is the problem, not mutas or anything else. P builds adepts and immortals and for some reason those two units are weak against mutas...
Your whole post is based upon some really backwards thinking, not the least is the above. Protoss players have the greatest incentive to play different builds that everyone else does: winning. There are obviously your Hases, Stardusts and so on playing SC2. They're just not winning. They're not winning because cheesing is a very, very bad option for Protoss vs Zerg in LotV. What's more, it's not just cheesing that's bad, but 2-base pressure in general (as I pointed out above, though you seemed to miss every single point). Protoss players aren't all doing the exact same build because it's "too good". They're doing the same build because anything else dies to scouting + muta switches. Even assuming the first were correct, there would still be players doing other things, if for no other reason than the surprise factor allowing them to win versus better opponents. That doesn't happen. The difference between LotV and HotS for Muta play is this: tech to defeat mutas still takes the same amount of time to get up whereas the resource bank needed to do a muta switch is much faster to achieve due to the new relative safety of zergs in the early-game (barring oracles / phoenix) and the starting workers change. In HotS, you had a ton of time ... you could do a 2-base pressure (with resources to back it up -- whose point wasn't to prevent mutas, but to economically harm the zerg -- yet the very act of pushing forced resources away from a potential switch, weakening the strategy, allowing more time to react to such a switch), you could go blink (and have time to get cannons up to delay to a stargate switch against mutas because your 2 bases wouldn't run out of resources amassing a defense and [barely] taking a third), you could do tons of things. In LotV, without a stargate, you have no way to pressure the zerg (allowing them to bank resources faster), you have more starting workers (allowing them to bank resources faster), and you run out of resources faster (on 2-base ... it's nearly impossible to take and defend a third versus a fast muta switch unless you've gone phoenix in LotV because you don't have the resources to do so). So, your surprise that everyone is opening up to counter mutas (phoenix) should really be leading you to wonder why ... it's because we have to. Literally all that Protoss needs to be able to open anything else is just a tiny amount of time to be able to survive the initial portion of a muta-switch. Not to be invincible. Not to force mutas to always be bad options versus Protoss ... just enough time to be able to start switching to phoenix. Again, I really dislike the change. I think it's bad overall for the game. I'd much prefer a change to mutas (why have +bio on spores and cannons instead of just nerfing muta regen, the cause for both of these changes). Mutas are absolutely the reason that everyone opens phoenix, however.
I'm convinced, thanks for enlightening me. ^_^ Very well written
|
On April 20 2016 01:44 Shuffleblade wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2016 00:20 Edowyth wrote:On April 19 2016 17:36 Shuffleblade wrote:
Its the builds that P goes for that is the problem, not mutas or anything else. P builds adepts and immortals and for some reason those two units are weak against mutas...
Your whole post is based upon some really backwards thinking, not the least is the above. Protoss players have the greatest incentive to play different builds that everyone else does: winning. There are obviously your Hases, Stardusts and so on playing SC2. They're just not winning. They're not winning because cheesing is a very, very bad option for Protoss vs Zerg in LotV. What's more, it's not just cheesing that's bad, but 2-base pressure in general (as I pointed out above, though you seemed to miss every single point). Protoss players aren't all doing the exact same build because it's "too good". They're doing the same build because anything else dies to scouting + muta switches. Even assuming the first were correct, there would still be players doing other things, if for no other reason than the surprise factor allowing them to win versus better opponents. That doesn't happen. The difference between LotV and HotS for Muta play is this: tech to defeat mutas still takes the same amount of time to get up whereas the resource bank needed to do a muta switch is much faster to achieve due to the new relative safety of zergs in the early-game (barring oracles / phoenix) and the starting workers change. In HotS, you had a ton of time ... you could do a 2-base pressure (with resources to back it up -- whose point wasn't to prevent mutas, but to economically harm the zerg -- yet the very act of pushing forced resources away from a potential switch, weakening the strategy, allowing more time to react to such a switch), you could go blink (and have time to get cannons up to delay to a stargate switch against mutas because your 2 bases wouldn't run out of resources amassing a defense and [barely] taking a third), you could do tons of things. In LotV, without a stargate, you have no way to pressure the zerg (allowing them to bank resources faster), you have more starting workers (allowing them to bank resources faster), and you run out of resources faster (on 2-base ... it's nearly impossible to take and defend a third versus a fast muta switch unless you've gone phoenix in LotV because you don't have the resources to do so). So, your surprise that everyone is opening up to counter mutas (phoenix) should really be leading you to wonder why ... it's because we have to. Literally all that Protoss needs to be able to open anything else is just a tiny amount of time to be able to survive the initial portion of a muta-switch. Not to be invincible. Not to force mutas to always be bad options versus Protoss ... just enough time to be able to start switching to phoenix. Again, I really dislike the change. I think it's bad overall for the game. I'd much prefer a change to mutas (why have +bio on spores and cannons instead of just nerfing muta regen, the cause for both of these changes). Mutas are absolutely the reason that everyone opens phoenix, however. I'm convinced, thanks for enlightening me. ^_^ Very well written
If you nerf muta regen that will kill them even harder in ZvT. That will give protoss more options but will kill mutas in both ZvP and ZvT. (To be fair they are quite dead in ZvP at this point)
|
On April 20 2016 01:44 Shuffleblade wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2016 00:20 Edowyth wrote:On April 19 2016 17:36 Shuffleblade wrote:
Its the builds that P goes for that is the problem, not mutas or anything else. P builds adepts and immortals and for some reason those two units are weak against mutas...
Your whole post is based upon some really backwards thinking, not the least is the above. Protoss players have the greatest incentive to play different builds that everyone else does: winning. There are obviously your Hases, Stardusts and so on playing SC2. They're just not winning. They're not winning because cheesing is a very, very bad option for Protoss vs Zerg in LotV. What's more, it's not just cheesing that's bad, but 2-base pressure in general (as I pointed out above, though you seemed to miss every single point). Protoss players aren't all doing the exact same build because it's "too good". They're doing the same build because anything else dies to scouting + muta switches. Even assuming the first were correct, there would still be players doing other things, if for no other reason than the surprise factor allowing them to win versus better opponents. That doesn't happen. The difference between LotV and HotS for Muta play is this: tech to defeat mutas still takes the same amount of time to get up whereas the resource bank needed to do a muta switch is much faster to achieve due to the new relative safety of zergs in the early-game (barring oracles / phoenix) and the starting workers change. In HotS, you had a ton of time ... you could do a 2-base pressure (with resources to back it up -- whose point wasn't to prevent mutas, but to economically harm the zerg -- yet the very act of pushing forced resources away from a potential switch, weakening the strategy, allowing more time to react to such a switch), you could go blink (and have time to get cannons up to delay to a stargate switch against mutas because your 2 bases wouldn't run out of resources amassing a defense and [barely] taking a third), you could do tons of things. In LotV, without a stargate, you have no way to pressure the zerg (allowing them to bank resources faster), you have more starting workers (allowing them to bank resources faster), and you run out of resources faster (on 2-base ... it's nearly impossible to take and defend a third versus a fast muta switch unless you've gone phoenix in LotV because you don't have the resources to do so). So, your surprise that everyone is opening up to counter mutas (phoenix) should really be leading you to wonder why ... it's because we have to. Literally all that Protoss needs to be able to open anything else is just a tiny amount of time to be able to survive the initial portion of a muta-switch. Not to be invincible. Not to force mutas to always be bad options versus Protoss ... just enough time to be able to start switching to phoenix. Again, I really dislike the change. I think it's bad overall for the game. I'd much prefer a change to mutas (why have +bio on spores and cannons instead of just nerfing muta regen, the cause for both of these changes). Mutas are absolutely the reason that everyone opens phoenix, however. I'm convinced, thanks for enlightening me. ^_^ Very well written
too bad very little of it is true. Protoss can still pressure with adepts.
& I already explained why the same build is used. Its because lurkers own stalkers so pure stalker isnt an option anymore so phoenix are a neccecity. all of this eco shit hes talkin about is not relevant.
|
On April 20 2016 01:59 RaFox17 wrote:
If you nerf muta regen that will kill them even harder in ZvT. That will give protoss more options but will kill mutas in both ZvP and ZvT. (To be fair they are quite dead in ZvP at this point)
The reason for that what you say equals the reason for why SC2 lost interest amongst many users.
If we want mutas without high regen to make sense again, we need to go down the long road and at the end of it nerf bio compositions: The removal of marauder from early & mid-game, as I have suggested it years ago.
Then terrans can't play "eat this", "again", "again" and so on. And zerg has to strategically decide where and if to use mutas and benefit or suffer from this decision making.
Of course many more things needed to be adapted. We finally find out that almost everything in SC2 is overpowered and why offence is so much better and more fun than defence. The "terrible terrible damage" problem will get into control through that. Game is getting more strategic and less macro oriented, game pace is getting a bit slower with more difficult and strategic decision making instead of the sole building of critical masses and go for it gameplay. Suddenly in this new environment mech is making sense again as well, and diversity of builds and strategy increases vastly as the frame they have to fit in widens. Come-backs after being behind or giving away advantages will more commonly happen. We would see players differentiating themselves from others alot more than now on the top end.
I am convinced this is what can make SC2 great again and bring back loads of users who turned their back towards the game. Blizzard! Make an alternate reality SC2 version where you develop back all these things step by step and see if you can get good results with it. This key was always laying there, you just have to go grab n' use it! You have to realize that balancing out one op thing with creating more op things was the very wrong way to go. The game is not getting more more exciting but more stale through that. You will finally realize I am sure, the question just is when.
|
I don't like this change. Mainly because Mutalisks are already pretty much dead in ZvT and with this change they're gonna be dead in ZvP as well. It might give Protoss one more option to play the game - while taking away an option from the Zerg players.
Giving the Protoss players an option to deal with mass mutalisk switches is a good idea - but not at the cost of killing any possible Spire openings for the Zerg, imo.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
On April 20 2016 01:59 RaFox17 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2016 01:44 Shuffleblade wrote:On April 20 2016 00:20 Edowyth wrote:On April 19 2016 17:36 Shuffleblade wrote:
Its the builds that P goes for that is the problem, not mutas or anything else. P builds adepts and immortals and for some reason those two units are weak against mutas...
Your whole post is based upon some really backwards thinking, not the least is the above. Protoss players have the greatest incentive to play different builds that everyone else does: winning. There are obviously your Hases, Stardusts and so on playing SC2. They're just not winning. They're not winning because cheesing is a very, very bad option for Protoss vs Zerg in LotV. What's more, it's not just cheesing that's bad, but 2-base pressure in general (as I pointed out above, though you seemed to miss every single point). Protoss players aren't all doing the exact same build because it's "too good". They're doing the same build because anything else dies to scouting + muta switches. Even assuming the first were correct, there would still be players doing other things, if for no other reason than the surprise factor allowing them to win versus better opponents. That doesn't happen. The difference between LotV and HotS for Muta play is this: tech to defeat mutas still takes the same amount of time to get up whereas the resource bank needed to do a muta switch is much faster to achieve due to the new relative safety of zergs in the early-game (barring oracles / phoenix) and the starting workers change. In HotS, you had a ton of time ... you could do a 2-base pressure (with resources to back it up -- whose point wasn't to prevent mutas, but to economically harm the zerg -- yet the very act of pushing forced resources away from a potential switch, weakening the strategy, allowing more time to react to such a switch), you could go blink (and have time to get cannons up to delay to a stargate switch against mutas because your 2 bases wouldn't run out of resources amassing a defense and [barely] taking a third), you could do tons of things. In LotV, without a stargate, you have no way to pressure the zerg (allowing them to bank resources faster), you have more starting workers (allowing them to bank resources faster), and you run out of resources faster (on 2-base ... it's nearly impossible to take and defend a third versus a fast muta switch unless you've gone phoenix in LotV because you don't have the resources to do so). So, your surprise that everyone is opening up to counter mutas (phoenix) should really be leading you to wonder why ... it's because we have to. Literally all that Protoss needs to be able to open anything else is just a tiny amount of time to be able to survive the initial portion of a muta-switch. Not to be invincible. Not to force mutas to always be bad options versus Protoss ... just enough time to be able to start switching to phoenix. Again, I really dislike the change. I think it's bad overall for the game. I'd much prefer a change to mutas (why have +bio on spores and cannons instead of just nerfing muta regen, the cause for both of these changes). Mutas are absolutely the reason that everyone opens phoenix, however. I'm convinced, thanks for enlightening me. ^_^ Very well written If you nerf muta regen that will kill them even harder in ZvT. That will give protoss more options but will kill mutas in both ZvP and ZvT. (To be fair they are quite dead in ZvP at this point)
Mainly because Mutalisks are already pretty much dead in ZvT
Biggest reason for that is liberator AA shutting down muta play hard - in low or high numbers
|
This would be such a miniscule change that I don't even think it would be logical to mass cannon vs mass mutalisk, but this makes Skytoss even more strong lol
|
On April 20 2016 02:35 Comedy wrote:
too bad very little of it is true. Protoss can still pressure with adepts.
If you're "pressuring" with adepts off of 2-base and the zerg opponent doesn't stop it with pure lings ... then you've invested a ton of resources into the "pressure" and the zerg is building speedlings and ravagers to stop you which immediately counter-attack for a huge advantage (since you've not invested at all into tech to actually defend ravagers).
On April 20 2016 02:35 Comedy wrote:
& I already explained why the same build is used. Its because lurkers own stalkers so pure stalker isnt an option anymore so phoenix are a neccecity. all of this eco shit hes talkin about is not relevant.
Zerg can't go both lurkers and a fast spire for a significant number of mutalisks. This is not a problem.
Lurkers also aren't the main reason that Protoss aren't building mass stalkers ... it's the combination of much-faster speedlings (and much-cheaper, again, due to faster income from quicker worker numbers compared to the tech needed to get to blink) and hydras (which, with the effectively cheaper speedlings, do too much damage for stalkers to begin to snow-ball like they did in HotS).
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
Another thing to note for stalkers being bad is that Ravagers are not armored
|
On April 20 2016 05:13 Swisslink wrote:
I don't like this change. Mainly because Mutalisks are already pretty much dead in ZvT and with this change they're gonna be dead in ZvP as well. It might give Protoss one more option to play the game - while taking away an option from the Zerg players.
Giving the Protoss players an option to deal with mass mutalisk switches is a good idea - but not at the cost of killing any possible Spire openings for the Zerg, imo.
I like the idea of opening up the mu but it can't be achieved like that : the only end result is indeed killing mutas for good while P will still get mass immortals every game vs lurkers and slightly less immortals with storm vs baneling centric compositions. The buff should go to stalker AA as many suggested and then you can test nerfs to the immortal and the lurker. Problem is you can't nerf either of them too much, otherwise other things (ultras, disruptors...) could become problematic. The mu is a tricky beast to balance atm and I honestly have no clue what the wisest move would be -but it's most certainly not that one, that even takes away some diversity off the mu.
To give my opinion : given how interesting baneling styles have looked recently I would just give the mu some time. And if I were to take some action that would probably be more something along the lines of an immortal nerf and if needed a very slight lurker nerf.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
At the moment there is talk of substantial swarmhost buffs for midgame play within weeks, so Z options will be expanding even further. I think that to be a good thing but P needs at least as much attention, probably more.
|
On April 20 2016 07:29 Cyro wrote:
At the moment there is talk of substantial swarmhost buffs for midgame play within weeks, so Z options will be expanding even further. I think that to be a good thing but P needs at least as much attention, probably more.
I wonder how any swarm host buff could be useful in PvZ if P keep on opening with phoenix
|
I still have yet to see LotV Chrono demonstrate its superiority over HotS Chrono. It seems unintuitive, so that scares new players off. It kills build order diversity. It's made PvZ worse for both being nerfed in the early game and failure to adequately respond to Mutas. I'm going to be a broken record but ideas don't really change if the situation has not.
|
On April 20 2016 07:40 Cloak wrote:
I still have yet to see LotV Chrono demonstrate its superiority over HotS Chrono. It seems unintuitive, so that scares new players off. It kills build order diversity. It's made PvZ worse for both being nerfed in the early game and failure to adequately respond to Mutas. I'm going to be a broken record but ideas don't really change if the situation has not.
Funnily enough I played a HotS game today out of nostalgia and the old chrono was indeed an infinitely superior concept. There are many things to like about LotV though, I admit the pace feels a lot better for instance.
|
By the way I feel worth mentioning someone brought out that a photon buff vs bio would indeed make air + storm lategame even harder to deal with, since tempests require corruptors. It would also take away some of the harassment potential bane styles possess -and they're probably what will make this mu evolve and hopefully progress.
I think those considerations would more or less force the buff to be vs light ; which would be kinda interesting, for instance it would probably help a lot in PvP to avoid mass phoenix wars. It would destroy DK's dream of banshees in TvP but who cares.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
On April 20 2016 07:40 Cloak wrote:
I still have yet to see LotV Chrono demonstrate its superiority over HotS Chrono. It seems unintuitive, so that scares new players off. It kills build order diversity. It's made PvZ worse for both being nerfed in the early game and failure to adequately respond to Mutas. I'm going to be a broken record but ideas don't really change if the situation has not.
LOTV chrono used to be objectively worse than HOTS chrono but mathematically slightly superior or on par in some situations. Then they nerfed it by like 1.5x so it's not even remotely competitive.
The "superiority" is the easier use when you're playing from 1, 2 and maybe 3 bases.
|
On April 20 2016 07:47 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2016 07:40 Cloak wrote:
I still have yet to see LotV Chrono demonstrate its superiority over HotS Chrono. It seems unintuitive, so that scares new players off. It kills build order diversity. It's made PvZ worse for both being nerfed in the early game and failure to adequately respond to Mutas. I'm going to be a broken record but ideas don't really change if the situation has not. Funnily enough I played a HotS game today out of nostalgia and the old chrono was indeed an infinitely superior concept. There are many things to like about LotV though, I admit the pace feels a lot better for instance.
Yea, I like LotV better for a number of global reasons and the new units, just I think they took a step backward with Chrono.
|
On April 19 2016 19:36 CheddarToss wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:16 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 04:13 Couguar wrote:
not cannons, stalkers pls. but this is right direction - less mutalisk switch power but what would the buff to stalkers be ? They already have +armored air damage which is pretty essential in fending off drops vT. Though if their anti air was changed to be +light while still doing its current damage to armored it would be an interesting move -diminishing the strenght of stargate in PvP and allowing to play blink vs mutas. It's simple, Stalkers shouldn't have bonus damage vs Air. They should have 14 dmg vs light and armored air. This change is soooooo long overdue. Blizzard refusing to patch Stalker AA damage has made stupid bandaid solutions (Anion Pulse-Crystals...) necessary.
I have an idea for a change that would not cause any potential nasty side effects on any other aspect of the game: Let stalkers continue to do their 10 damage a shot vs light and 14 damage a shot vs air, BUT
vs "light bio air" only they will get a separate damage value (could be 12,14? numbers can be tested and tweaked ...).
With the muta being the only light bio unit in the game (protoss and terran won't probably even ever feature a bio air unit at all due to racial design) and the corruptor/overlord/overseer/broodlord very unlikely to ever become light air units I can not see any real restrictions put onto the game. It can be tested to find a reasonable value while not changing any other unit interaction in the game. Stalker warpins are literally easily available for any potential protoss pvz style that would be available without committing or already having phoenix out, no matter how the metagame would change ever. With the exception of mass air styles (which have only air already ... :-)) every protoss play style that makes will have a good amount of gateways. They are mobile enough to establish bases etc which is super vital in LOTV. Turtling on 3 bases for a while like in pre-lotv times just does not work any more. Your main and natural will be mined out way too quickly.
How do canons help you at securing a new expansion in the open (especially those shitty maps out there in the current map pool)? How to you defend your tech infrastructure from getting unpowered in no-time? Do you even mass up canons there? Do I make 20 canons in total (3-4 for each mineral line on 3-4 bases and some canons around my tech infrastructure??? Archons do great in straight up combat with support, but they are clunky and get blocked by your own buildings and with their speed and range3 never catch or stop mutas from harassing anyways. Without enough support they are a free magic box kill by a group of mutas anyways. Same for templar with storm or sentries. All those units are great and cost efficient but they only ever work in bigger groups in head-on engagements. The problem is getting too far behind until you actually get a group of phoenix out if you need to make stargates + phoenix reactionary (especially with the lotv chronoboost) which leaves stalkers as the only ready-available option. You can literally never know which units are going to hatch from the zerg's eggs until those mutas pop out and head to your base. In the later stages of the game every decent zerg will have a spire up, even if it's just for a later broodlord transition and once the must-have group of phoenix dies they simply make a full round of mutas, that's what they have been waiting for all the time.
When I play zerg 1vs1 ladder (worse than my protoss, some mid master level, so nothing good but at least basics are there), most of the time you feel like you can not make mutas because they would be next to useless since every protoss blindly makes their hardcounter (phoenix). But whenever they actually do not open like that or they lost their phoenix in an engagement (like had to use them vs a huge hydra-speedbane-ling push at their front) investing into a huge group of mutas feels way too strong. It's too binary. I could even see a muta buff in addition with a stalker buff or making phoenix weaker against them (still being good but less of a hardcounter) so that it could be viable for a zerg to add some mutas as a mobile raiding group (options!) even if a group of phoenix is out (maybe they should have the exact same unit movement speed?) but making it actually possible/viable to deflect mutas without them by protoss.
|
Mutalisks were always my favorite unit
Now they suck. Ok, I'll just get into a catatonic state and dream of Julyzerg microing against Best's Dragoons...
|
On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc).
Sure. But in that case, we'll need a nerf on that Pheonix range upgrade and liberator will need an overall damage nerf if we'd like to avoid making mutas non-existent in all match ups. Was the muta regeneration a bad buff to give them? Yeah. But unfortunately, I feel the current units that counter mutas counter them so hard already that they need the regeneration to avoid being completely and utterly useless as soon as a handful of pheonix arrive or 1 or 2 liberators pop out.
|
On April 20 2016 07:13 [PkF] Wire wrote:
To give my opinion : given how interesting baneling styles have looked recently I would just give the mu some time. And if I were to take some action that would probably be more something along the lines of an immortal nerf and if needed a very slight lurker nerf.
That is not enough. not even by a long shot. On Zest's level and in GSL, where less "creative" maps are being used, PvZ may seem kinda balanced. But on super creative ladder maps, which all the other tournaments are using, and below the godly Zest level of play, Zerg is downright imbalanced.
Zerg players on TL tend to downplay aligulac, but PvZ has been at or below 45% since release of LotV. This kind of imbalance and for this long is without precedent. Something needs to be done and it ain't an Immortal nerf.
|
On April 19 2016 03:50 InfCereal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:46 [PkF] Wire wrote:On April 19 2016 03:43 Jonsoload wrote:We saw the feedback/suggestion last weekend that Protoss having to commit to Phoenix due to the Mutalisk switch threat. There were many well reasoned out discussions around this, so we thought it would be good to start testing a change here in the next balance test map.
Of the couple suggestions that we saw most of, we believe that increasing the Photon Cannon AA damage vs. bio would be the best change. This would be such a small change that only affects the PvZ matchup. Source: us.battle.net Horrible bandaid suggestion. Do what is long overdue and get rid of muta regen and all the stupidities it forced (spore +bio damage, anion pulse crystals, liberators aoe etc). Curious, do you also think spore +bio damage is a horrible bandaid? That said, if you're going to give everything +bio vs air, may as well just nerf muta health
Its not the same. Mutas can't engage armies. They are only worth if you can keep opponents attention. You have to use mutalisks constantly, but mutas are not tanky and die very fast. Thats why they have regen.
The buff to defense helps defending important regions without denying mutalisks harass. That means the opponent will at least have a safe mineral line until he arrives wih army.
If you just revert regen, mutalisks will be worthless. Zergs will only attack, once they have upgrades and/or a big number. Thats not the role/purpose of mutalisks. They are not cheap for a unit that can't engage an army.
|
On April 19 2016 03:53 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 03:50 Shuffleblade wrote:
Erm mutas already have a niche and rare spot in ZvP as it stands. Protoss have gotten just more and more effective ways to deal with them, nerfing them even more in the matchup seems unjustified to me.
Btw I find it hilarious that they think cannon buff is going to help against mass muta switches.... Thats just stupid, even if the P builds 6 cannons at each base 40 mutas roflstomp it, probably not losing a single one unless the cannons are lucky with their shots or the cannons are very close together. That would not effect the matchup much besides making it even more stupid to open muta in zvp and overlord drops would also be easier to defend.
Protoss does not need stronger defense, come on. I agree this is definitely not the way to go for the reason you stated : if the Z managed to get a good number of mutas, no cannon buff will help. An upgrade giving cannons anti air aoe was suggested at some point, it makes slightly more sense but I still think the problem is the mutas, not their counters.
Sorry, but why should canons save you from an 80 supply army thats worth 4000-4000. Don't understand that point.
80 supply bio is even stronger, 40 blink stalkers can't be stopped by canons either. But it should be different with mutas?
If zerg can do such a mass mutalisk switch, then the player has lost the game long before that.
The canon buff is not against 40 mutas, its against 10-20 mutas max. 2-4 canons will keep you safe against 20 mutas. If mutas still trade, then they will lose a lot more resources than protoss. Thats the goal just as in zvz. Its a very good solution! It removes the problem but keeps the positive.
|
On April 19 2016 04:33 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On April 19 2016 04:29 Draddition wrote:On April 19 2016 04:20 Gwavajuice wrote:
2 - that's not true, just look how spore crawler buff changed ZvZ.
This, 1000x this. You guys mistake the goal here, the same problem so many have with the widow mine. This change would NOT be to have cannons always kill all the muta's. Its to slow the muta player down so that his opponent can respond. Better cannons means the muta player either has to mass muta's before fighting, which gives time for the protoss to tech to pheonix, or it gives a solid defenders advantage to the blink stalkers/templar/etc. I fear the end result would be that : 1- P will still play the same style all over again, with or without phoenix (even if I didn't fear muta switches I would open phoenix every game because of the harass possibilities and the scouting opportunities) ; 2- no PvZ will ever see a muta again. So overall I don't think this is a sensible change -you even lose some variety in the end, even if muta switches are already pretty rare- if you don't combine it with changes to immortals for instance.
We already know the endresult from zvz in hots. Its not about muta switches. If a zerg can switch to 40 mutas, then you have lost the game already.
If zerg plays mutalisks, expanding is very difficult, because he will keep you in your main. If your army is in main, he will attack third and so on. Canons will give protoss a bigger defenders advantage and let him expand against mutalisk openers. But canons wont stop harass because you cant put everywhere a canon. Thats why this change is so great.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
If zerg can do such a mass mutalisk switch, then the player has lost the game long before that.
It's pretty easy to pop 10-15 mutas and climb to 30-40 in a reasonable amount of time if the game situation is right. My archon partner played a game vs Catz on stream earlier with a non-stargate PvZ opening and that happened - https://www.twitch.tv/rootcatz/v/62098409 2:57:15
If you're not preemptively playing stargate and you're not killing the zerg before X timing, muta play comes up very often and is quite strong.
Since Legacy is high econ relative to previous expansions, the window of time where mutas are bad against stalkers seems smaller. Stalkers scale poorly due to their huge size to DPS ratio (can't fit many into a small space) and huge amount of wasted shots, especially on air units - they much prefer a 10v10 fight to a 30v30 fight.
On that subject, i'd like to see a stalker modified to attack air instantly and without overkill like a marine just to experiment and see exactly how much difference it makes. Anyone know the map editor well enough to do that?
|
I do not see any real chance of playing against zerg without always having a stargate and phoenix out if this current canon change is the only thing that is going to change. It's funny how terrans have been saying that mutas should not be hard to deal with as protoss since you have blink stalkers etc, but they do not realise how huge the difference between blink stalkers and marines is vs mutas. I have yet to talk with one single protoss who finds mutas "not-too-much-of-a-problem" or "easy-to-handle" without falling behind without phoenix.
Imagine a terran having to keep 4-5x as many marines back hin his base against mutas and turrets both being more expensive, doing less dps vs air, not being able to be repaired and being able to unpower them. This is kinda how it feels as protoss, since keeping like 2 templar with 2-3 canons is getting them sniped for free or losing all in exchange for 2 mutas. :-)
My zerg clanmates keep telling me mutas vs no stargate is a free win, there is a reason every zerg immediatelly is keen on going into mutas upon not seeing a stargate. Unfortunately I never get the chance to make mutas when I 1vs1 as zerg, since everybody and his grandmother goes stargate. :-)
A real solution would be to adjust the stalker anti air vs mutas (be it overkill, dps, splash ... whatever) or adding a robo unit which is very good at handling mutas, then I can see this working. Archons, sentries and templar usually just work against mutas in your army, they just don't work all that well at defending 3-4 bases since in low counts they just get sniped for free, are stuck between buildings (archons), can not catch up with mutas or just get ignored.
In lotv it's kinda a summary of many things, mutas got their speed and regen (this is the most important part) buffed over time, amulet got removed (really old WOL times allowed a very different blink+storm defence), the new eco system making it so that you need to take a 4th decently quickly since you mine out so fast (before you could stay on a healthy 3 base eco for a while without getting totally outmacroed, zerg transitions being stronger (lurker, cracklings, ultras etc).
I think mutas are not really the biggest issue in zvp, they are kinda retardedly good without phoenix but as long as phoenix are out they are just kinda a "never really going to meet them anyways" thing (do not ever lose those phoenix do or remake them blindly even if you do not want them any more). It just pigeonholes playstyles, but there are more restrictions in other matchups as well. The whole hardcounter system ist just bad, phoenix are way too good vs mutas while mutas vs non-phoenix are way too strong as well. Similar with ultras. A high immortal count makes using ultralisks like committing suicide while having non or a very low count out (like after losing them when fighting vs crackling-broodlord etc) the newest expansions get amoved over by crackling-ultra since even a kinda big 3/3/3 gateway army without a big immortal-archon count can not stop them. So while micro and positioning helps, it's a lot about always having the right amount of hardcounter units out which I feel makes them game way worse than it could be. Certain units and compositions can definitely fair better vs other things, but once the hardcounters become too extreme it's no fun any more (even if balance statistics can talk about a 50% winrate).
|
On April 19 2016 03:50 Shuffleblade wrote:
Erm mutas already have a niche and rare spot in ZvP as it stands. Protoss have gotten just more and more effective ways to deal with them, nerfing them even more in the matchup seems unjustified to me.
Btw I find it hilarious that they think cannon buff is going to help against mass muta switches.... Thats just stupid, even if the P builds 6 cannons at each base 40 mutas roflstomp it, probably not losing a single one unless the cannons are lucky with their shots or the cannons are very close together. That would not effect the matchup much besides making it even more stupid to open muta in zvp and overlord drops would also be easier to defend.
Protoss does not need stronger defense, come on.
Come on man, letting zerg use 4000 gas offensively on you unchecked should always kill you
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
