|
I would appreciate if someone could tell me If my observations of watching pretty much every pro tournament in HOTS and LOTV are correct and how the differences can be explained.
HOTS TvP equally skilled players macro game no significant early damage either side done:
T besides very first minutes slightly ahead economically cause fast 2 Orbitals that led to faster 3rd that was also build on the expansion spot mostly. That led to a 10-40 supply lead midgame (around 150 supply). Units Bio vs Blinkstalker/Colo/Zealot roughly.
LOTV same scenario:
P seems to have a slight eco advantage that seems to get quite huge after 3rd/4th base. Midgame now I see the P having more supply. Units are Bio vs gateway+immos.
Now if the above is somewhat true then how did the income curve not change?
Obviously there are more factors than mules/boost to consider and the reason I see T behind midgame in alot of aspects is probably cause there is almost never a scenario where the T does not take early damage.
In PvZ in HOTS I saw Zergs jumping ahead in worker count after 35 by up to 10-15 or even more although more was greedy and very punishable. Now I see same worker counts up to 60-70 whatever the end amount of workers is both players want.
These are just my observations and by no means any balance complain. I just think its not correct to say economy states are similar or the same. How the changes get justified and if they actually are balanced other people have to decide with more knowledge and skill.
Let me know if Im totally wrong here, thx.
|
|
|
On June 20 2016 10:08 loko822 wrote:
I would appreciate if someone could tell me If my observations of watching pretty much every pro tournament in HOTS and LOTV are correct and how the differences can be explained.
HOTS TvP equally skilled players macro game no significant early damage either side done:
T besides very first minutes slightly ahead economically cause fast 2 Orbitals that led to faster 3rd that was also build on the expansion spot mostly. That led to a 10-40 supply lead midgame (around 150 supply). Units Bio vs Blinkstalker/Colo/Zealot roughly.
LOTV same scenario:
P seems to have a slight eco advantage that seems to get quite huge after 3rd/4th base. Midgame now I see the P having more supply. Units are Bio vs gateway+immos.
Now if the above is somewhat true then how did the income curve not change?
Obviously there are more factors than mules/boost to consider and the reason I see T behind midgame in alot of aspects is probably cause there is almost never a scenario where the T does not take early damage.
In PvZ in HOTS I saw Zergs jumping ahead in worker count after 35 by up to 10-15 or even more although more was greedy and very punishable. Now I see same worker counts up to 60-70 whatever the end amount of workers is both players want.
These are just my observations and by no means any balance complain. I just think its not correct to say economy states are similar or the same. How the changes get justified and if they actually are balanced other people have to decide with more knowledge and skill.
Let me know if Im totally wrong here, thx.
very well said,
without a macro comparison between races, this study doesn't mean that much. Yes it is a slight nerf for P in numbers, however it is a big buff for PvZ and PvT considering how inject and mule were butchered.
|
Since I was the one who did a rather stupid analysis on an excel sheet before and spoke out to the community. I am so glad to see how its really done. Not to mention also how well this is done.
Read through the entire thing and loved it. You rock sholip!!
Another request would be to compare how all economies have been affected since the macro nurfs as many other people like me keep speculating.
Amazing thread man!
|
So basically the Chrono nerf is kind of a joke early game and the reason Protoss is almost always ahead in eco, then it is even easier and safer with the MotherCore to defend building a faster eco...
|
So avilo was spreading misinformation?? How surprising... *eyeroll*
Good job on taking the time to do this. It takes 10 times the effort to disprove misinformation that it takes to spread it in the first hand.
|
On June 20 2016 10:18 Aegwynn wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 10:08 loko822 wrote:
I would appreciate if someone could tell me If my observations of watching pretty much every pro tournament in HOTS and LOTV are correct and how the differences can be explained.
HOTS TvP equally skilled players macro game no significant early damage either side done:
T besides very first minutes slightly ahead economically cause fast 2 Orbitals that led to faster 3rd that was also build on the expansion spot mostly. That led to a 10-40 supply lead midgame (around 150 supply). Units Bio vs Blinkstalker/Colo/Zealot roughly.
LOTV same scenario:
P seems to have a slight eco advantage that seems to get quite huge after 3rd/4th base. Midgame now I see the P having more supply. Units are Bio vs gateway+immos.
Now if the above is somewhat true then how did the income curve not change?
Obviously there are more factors than mules/boost to consider and the reason I see T behind midgame in alot of aspects is probably cause there is almost never a scenario where the T does not take early damage.
In PvZ in HOTS I saw Zergs jumping ahead in worker count after 35 by up to 10-15 or even more although more was greedy and very punishable. Now I see same worker counts up to 60-70 whatever the end amount of workers is both players want.
These are just my observations and by no means any balance complain. I just think its not correct to say economy states are similar or the same. How the changes get justified and if they actually are balanced other people have to decide with more knowledge and skill.
Let me know if Im totally wrong here, thx. very well said, without a macro comparison between races, this study doesn't mean that much. Yes it is a slight nerf for P in numbers, however it is a big buff for PvZ and PvT considering how inject and mule were butchered.
'Yes yes your math is all well and good...but here's some hyperbole and exaggeration! P got big buffs FACT, injects and mules were just BUTCHERED.'
|
On June 20 2016 04:10 Sholip wrote:
Also, even if it does not affect early game economy where all the boosts go into worker production anyway, it is also worth noting that in HotS you could bank up energy on the Nexus on purpose, and later use it continuously on a longer upgrade or unit, like Warp Gate. This is no longer possible in LotV.
Alas, poor Korean-style 4 Warpgate All-In.
You were the worst, but then you were the best when you kept working in Diamond League despite the nerfs.
|
On June 20 2016 13:01 Fanatic-Templar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 04:10 Sholip wrote:
Also, even if it does not affect early game economy where all the boosts go into worker production anyway, it is also worth noting that in HotS you could bank up energy on the Nexus on purpose, and later use it continuously on a longer upgrade or unit, like Warp Gate. This is no longer possible in LotV. Alas, poor Korean-style 4 Warpgate All-In. You were the worst, but then you were the best when you kept working in High Masters despite the nerfs.
I fixed that for you.
|
I did actually know that Chrono Boost also applied a debuff to energy regeneration speed - this is why the Nexus itself didn't generate mana at a faster rate than usual when you were chronoboosting your probes out.
But did anyone else also know that if you somehow put chronoboost on a terran building that is burning, that it will burn down at an accelerated rate compared to before?
I'm also reasonably sure that once upon a time when I tried this, it also made flying terran buildings fly faster.
Also, if you were to create a damage over time effect spell that could also affect buildings, then a chronoboosted building would take damage at an increased rate (but not take more damage over all)
Just think about all the hilarious offensive uses and combos for chronoboost there could have been, once upon a time
|
On June 20 2016 14:12 The_Frozen_Inferno wrote:
I did actually know that Chrono Boost also applied a debuff to energy regeneration speed - this is why the Nexus itself didn't generate mana at a faster rate than usual when you were chronoboosting your probes out.
But did anyone else also know that if you somehow put chronoboost on a terran building that is burning, that it will burn down at an accelerated rate compared to before?
I'm also reasonably sure that once upon a time when I tried this, it also made flying terran buildings fly faster.
Also, if you were to create a damage over time effect spell that could also affect buildings, then a chronoboosted building would take damage at an increased rate (but not take more damage over all)
Just think about all the hilarious offensive uses and combos for chronoboost there could have been, once upon a time
I'm not sure about the Burning Building part, but I did try to Chrono things back when the Tempest was given a big DoT spell and Chrono heavily sped up the process of the spell.
|
Portugal33 Posts
good post 
since others already pointed it would be nice to compare with zerg/terran econ in lotv will just clear something i was in doubt while reading. If i'm not mistaken the probes build time is 12s, 17s is from hots when faster also affected game clock and time tooltips right?
even though it won't be as accurate as possible due to different openers and required defense investments (in addition to different building costs), a linear worker build and total minerals mined for the other races to compare could be already good.
|
I agree with you on all but one point and that is the argument that the lotv CB is better due to it being able to be used from the start is moot. What you should have done (if possible) is compare how the hots chronoboost would have fared if it was unchanged in lotv. The arguement that the they are compareable due to 25 energy being accumulated when 12 workers are out in hots is invalid in my opinion. You can't directly compare the economic models of hots and lotv in that way.
To thorougly disapprove this myth I would like to know how much less worker/minerals protoss would have at the time that hots CB would be usable if they wouldn't have changed the CB from hots to lotv. In other Words, how would hots cb compare to lotv cb in the economic model of lotv is whay really should be considered here in my opinion.
I don't really believe there is a reason to do this though since your numbers clearly show that the result will be that the new lotv CB is inferior. It was nerfed and I am not disputing that but the arguement that the lotv CB help protoss early game in comparision is actually valid.
|
Austria24422 Posts
Awesome analysis.
I really hate the new chronoboost. It's incredibly clunky to use, weaker, takes far less skill to use compared to HotS, takes away strategical depth, feels like it does absolutely nothing.
|
United Kingdom20341 Posts
LOTV chrono boost was a minor nerf overall IMO when it was +22.5%. When they reduced its effectiveness by 1.5x after that (to +15%) it became a pretty huge nerf
Being able to bank energy for any amount of time (rather than having to spend it instantly) and being able to use the energy from more than 1 nexus towards the same goal were both very powerful tools that every protoss used every game
-----
These are just my observations and by no means any balance complain. I just think its not correct to say economy states are similar or the same.
I think this is not related to chrono boost, there are far bigger unrelated macro changes in Legacy.
|
Sorry but most of the european pros forgot about chrono after 5 minute mark so it doesnt count
|
Czech Republic12131 Posts
On June 20 2016 19:15 Nerchio wrote:
Sorry but most of the european pros forgot about chrono after 5 minute mark so it doesnt count
That's OK, nobody counted them into the level of where it doesn't matter 
|
Its simple math, please guys!
Old chrono makes things 50% faster for 20s. It takes rougly 45s until you can use the next chrono. The new chrono makes things 15% faster, but has no limit. We compare now how much time you safe in the same time period (until the old chrono restarts).
Now i am not sure, if mana fills up, when chrono still is active. Thats why i calculate both cases:
Mana fills after chrono:
Old: 0.50 * 20 = 10s
New: 0.15 * (20 + 45) = 9.75s
Mana fills while chrono:
Old: 0.50 * 20 = 10s
New: 0.15 * 45 = 6.75s
This is hots time, but it doesnt matter for the comparision. As you can see the old is always better. It was clearly a nerf.
Before the change you could use all your mana for one purpose and boost it significantly. That created strong timings and was very strategic.
I think chrono was one of the best macro mechanics. It required attention if you used it for worker production and upgrades. That was important for higher leagues. But when you missed one in lower leagues, the punishment was only small, because your opponent was just as bad at keeping timings as you and you could just boost something else.
|
United Kingdom20341 Posts
I thought that the old chrono was pretty "newb-friendly" anyway because you could bank 4 chrono's worth of energy anyway (like an orbital command).
The best and obvious course of action was to spend the first 2-4 as soon as possible because the economic gains were too great to ignore with any opening, but after that people would typically bank ~1-2 at times and the energy would rarely sit in the 50-100% range. That was useful for the people who would typically forget or mess up chrono at lower levels of play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
