|
On June 21 2016 16:03 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2016 15:50 BronzeKnee wrote:The game timer changes account for the difference fully, it isn't faster it is exactly the same. The timer moved faster in HOTS and it was slowed down in LOTV. Game speed changes
The default game speed 'Faster' is now 1 to 1 with real time. Thus a game that lasted 12 in-game minutes now lasted 12 actual minutes instead of 12 / 1.4 ~= 8 minutes and 34 seconds.
Consequently all unit movement speeds, rate of fire, build times and ability cooldowns have their numbers changed. For example a 110 second upgrade will now state 110 / 1.4 ~= 79 seconds in the tooltip, and have had its actual research time rounded to this number. Note that it still takes almost exactly the same time to finish such an upgrade because the in-game time is going proportionally slower.
Avilo's HOTS time: 4:45 or 285 seconds.
Avilo's LOTV time: 3:25 or 205 seconds x 1.4 (to account for timer changes) = 287 seconds.
So yeah, Protoss is exactly the same when it comes saturating a base in LOTV as HOTS, according to his own video. That is why the Nexus in both games was at the same point when full saturation occurred, because everything is the same. Chronoboost did not get buffed. It is the same. Use a stop watch with your replays instead of the in game timer and you'll realize this. Except that it's not the same regardless because chrono is used differently in the two games. In HOTS you don't 100% chrono probes, where as a hell of a lot of LOTV games probes are being chrono boosted almost 100% with no built up chrono. In HOTS, a player might accumulate chrono from forgetting to use it or not doing it perfectly. In LOTV, you'll never not forget to use it. Remember when queens had auto-inject? Zerg was ridiculous during beta on those patches because even if "larva inject was the same" the fact that you never, ever needed to remember to do it meant you were macroing almost perfectly and the game was kind of playing itself. LOTV chrono is a lot better than HOTS chrono because of this. Even in ladder games, streams, and pro-games you can see Protoss has their 3rd base and probe saturation very far ahead of Terran. And if that's true about the HOTS timer not being updated to LOTV timer that still proves my point assuming what you're saying is true... Even in the case of what you're saying where the times are approximately even...now imagine the HOTS Protoss is not using 100% chrono on probes for even 2-3 cycles...it's a huge difference.
Thanks for taking the time to test things, it's appriciated. There are a few things I would note, though.
- The timer, of course, as others said, is not the same in LotV and HotS. This means your own test, too, shows that the HotS version is (although really marginally) a bit stronger, but at least by no means weaker than the LotV Chrono.
- I feel starting the HotS testing from 12 supply but 0 Chrono energy is unfair. It is not easy to find a point to compare the two economic systems, but in HotS when you reached 12 supply, you also had almost exactly 25 energy on your Nexus. So I think it would only be fair to start the HotS testing from 12 supply and 25 energy. I wonder how much it would change the results.
- I don't know if Protoss players tend to use Chrono less often on structures other than the Nexus in the early game in LotV, but it is sure that it is not used exclusively on the Nexus. I just randomly opened 4 SPL/SSL games and in every one Chrono was used on other structures in the early game.
- What you are obviously right about is the LotV Chrono is harder to forget to use. The only situation in which it can happen is if you switch targets and forget it on a structure where it is no longer needed. True, this should not happen often in the early game. But I wonder, what was the average energy on Nexi in the early game for a pro Protoss player? I think it was used pretty effectively before the mid-late game.
All that said, I don't think the new Chrono would be stronger than the old one. It can, however, be that T and Z got nerfed more heavily regarding economy, coming into LotV. This is something that may be worth looking into more deeply.
|
Italy12246 Posts
I imagine the best way to compare the HotS and LotV would be to check relative worker counts between races (past 12 supply), or better yet relative income (to account for mules), up to full two base saturation for Protoss (third timings changes so they would bias the data), by looking at a a few pro replays for instance.
Obviously that's not conclusive since unit usage has changed greatly and we rely a little more on gateway units, but in terms of raw economy i can't think of a better way.
|
The problem with Chronpboost is that a Protoss can have it targeted on a Gateway or Robo for example and have it crank out units that much faster without forcing the Protoss player to manage the Chrono like how Zergs have to inject or Terrans have to build units from their production buildings. Same can be said for upgrades. It's just set it and leave it while the other races still have to manage their macro mechanics.
|
What I find most annoying about the LOTV chronoboost is when I have to move it from one structure to an other: since I usually have all nexuses (nexai?) on the same hotkey, when I assign the chrono to a new structure (e.g. cyber -> forge), I have to reset it on all the other structures where I want it because I cannot decide to move it directly from structure A to structure B (so many times it messes up).. [ I feel I wasn't very clear  ]
I know it's a small thing and probably proplayers can do it very efficiently, but it feels very messy and not "clean" as an ability to use.
|
On June 21 2016 12:56 avilo wrote:
[...]LOTV chrono is 100% stronger than HOTS chrono[...]
In LOTV, most chronoboost usage is on probes because it's on them 100% of the time.
Despite the fact chrono is weaker in LOTV in terms of raw number/probe output, the fact that it's on the probes 100% of the time over a long period of time means it's insanely more effective than a player that accumulates 75-100 chrono and wasn't chronoing their probes in the first place.
LOTV chrono is a lot stronger than HOTS chrono - there is no myth. Your analysis lacks a lot of gameplay elements and the difference in how both are used in their corresponding games.
It also fails to acknowledge that at a start of a game where both player's economies are just building up, it's insanely more beneficial to have a boosted economy for the first 30-40 workers of the game.
[...]
That is currently what Protoss is able to achieve in LOTV from the very start of a game, which makes their economy stronger than it supposed to be at the start of the game. Whether or not you think it's stronger than HOTS chronoboost does not matter - the fact is P chronoboost in LOTV is allowing them a too strong of a start that's not supposed to be possible [...]
The big difference is T/Z have the nerfed macro mechanics overall, whereas P is getting this constant probe boost throughout the entire game with zero human error, and also is starting the game with an unfair economy advantage due to the worker boost.
I don't even know where to start, there are so many blatantly wrong statements. I mean hell, someone who says "most of it is used on X because it gets used on X 100% of the time" loses all credibility right there.
You are talking like Trump: A lot of buzzwords, hyperboles, unsupported claims and clear lack of knowledge across all parts of your posts.
You are seriously comparing the LotV chrono to the HotS chrono assuming that everyone banks up 75-100 energy on their nexus because they suck at playing the game. What kind of nonsense comparison is this?
What makes you say that the Protoss economy is stronger than it is supposed to be? "Supposed to" according to whom?
I don't know what kind of games you have been playing and watching lately, but I don't remember seeing a long game where Protoss used all their chrono on their nexus for the entire game.
You fault Scholip for his lack of gameplay proof, yet your own thread was lacking examples from pro play or test videos of comparisons as well.
And I am not even going into that 2nd post, that video was just painful to watch for anyone who has some tiny resemblance of knowledge about HotS and LotV... it simply showed your complete lack thereof and it is a great example of why your opinions and claims - these are not facts, mind you - hold no merit in any civilized discussion.
|
Let's not forget Zerg lost its larvae production (4 to 3) via queens too, and Terrans got..what, a lategame nerf? I think it's fair to say even true, at least you Toss players need not worry about its effect on you.
|
Netherlands1385 Posts
On June 22 2016 00:36 DarKcS wrote:
Let's not forget Zerg lost its larvae production (4 to 3) via queens too, and Terrans got..what, a lategame nerf? I think it's fair to say even true, at least you Toss players need not worry about its effect on you.
Terran: less minerals per mule and they cant be stacked. So its a big nerf.
|
On June 21 2016 16:03 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2016 15:50 BronzeKnee wrote:The game timer changes account for the difference fully, it isn't faster it is exactly the same. The timer moved faster in HOTS and it was slowed down in LOTV. Game speed changes
The default game speed 'Faster' is now 1 to 1 with real time. Thus a game that lasted 12 in-game minutes now lasted 12 actual minutes instead of 12 / 1.4 ~= 8 minutes and 34 seconds.
Consequently all unit movement speeds, rate of fire, build times and ability cooldowns have their numbers changed. For example a 110 second upgrade will now state 110 / 1.4 ~= 79 seconds in the tooltip, and have had its actual research time rounded to this number. Note that it still takes almost exactly the same time to finish such an upgrade because the in-game time is going proportionally slower.
Avilo's HOTS time: 4:45 or 285 seconds.
Avilo's LOTV time: 3:25 or 205 seconds x 1.4 (to account for timer changes) = 287 seconds.
So yeah, Protoss is exactly the same when it comes saturating a base in LOTV as HOTS, according to his own video. That is why the Nexus in both games was at the same point when full saturation occurred, because everything is the same. Chronoboost did not get buffed. It is the same. Use a stop watch with your replays instead of the in game timer and you'll realize this. In HOTS, a player might accumulate chrono from forgetting to use it or not doing it perfectly. In LOTV, you'll never not forget to use it.
In LOTV keeping the chrono on the Nexus when Protoss has the number of Probes they want is wasteful and means they forgot to switch to another structure. So people do and can forget to use it.
In HOTS when both armies are maxed out, having max chronoboost on 4 Nexus means that when the fight happens and I need to re-max, I can do it way faster than in LOTV. The change to chronoboost is a gigantic nerf to Protoss lategame.
Chronoboost doesn't put Protoss behind economically compared to before (when plenty of players did use chrono on their Nexus), but when it comes to tech, army, and late game remaxing, the nerf really hurts.
I'd love the old chronoboost back, it was stronger, especially when remaxing late game. LOTV chrono is significantly weaker.
The final thing I want to say is who cares? Seriously, who really cares about this issue at all? It is like claiming because the Corvette is fastest and most expensive Chevy, it is best. But that is subjective and it depends. If you want go on a vacation with a family of 4, the Corvette is a terrible choice. If you need to tow a boat, it is terrible too.
Subjectively deciding that saturating two bases quickly is somehow meaningful (without evidence of how it is meaningful) is the same as claiming that the Corvette is the best. And the point of SC2 isn't to fully saturate two bases as fast as you can, so it really doesn't matter. The point is to win the game. And any massive advantage doesn't flesh out in the win rates, which is the one objective measure we have.
So even if Protoss can saturate two bases faster in LOTV than in HOTS (and that isn't true), it wouldn't matter unless it was fleshed out in the win rates.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
Avilo's HOTS time: 4:45 or 285 seconds.
Avilo's LOTV time: 3:25 or 205 seconds x 1.4 (to account for timer changes) = 287 seconds.
When you produce 8 workers in the time that it would take to produce 7, you have a mineral advantage from having faster workers during that time. Your advantage at about 1:30 in the game seems to be 1 extra worker and 0 minerals. By the third nexus timing there should be a significant advantage (3 probes and ~100 minerals banked?) compared to no macro mechanic at all, but the old chrono boost could also bring this kind of advantage.
---
This argument was a simple mistake, though a surprising one. The result is absurd enough to make it obvious that there is a major problem (time running 1.4x faster in HOTS) that was way out of the scale of macro mechanic changes.. some of the other arguments are not huge mistakes like this, they are just awful.
|
How can a player of Avilos calibre believe the new chrono is stronger?
|
Yes, it was a simple mistake, but people will continue to peddle whatever argument to further their cause that Protoss needs some kind of nerf immediately.
|
On June 22 2016 03:01 404AlphaSquad wrote:
How can a player of Avilos calibre believe the new chrono is stronger?
Because people of avilos caliber have very limited knowledge?
|
On June 22 2016 03:01 404AlphaSquad wrote:
How can a player of Avilos calibre believe the new chrono is stronger?
Becuase players of Avilo's caliber would much rather get blizzard to buff their race rather than actually try to improve their own play.
|
On June 22 2016 03:01 404AlphaSquad wrote:
How can a player of Avilos calibre believe the new chrono is stronger?
Because it is objectively stronger?
A few people were pointing out that the timer on HOTS was not updated to the LOTV timer.
If that is true then the test i did still shows that LOTV chrono is stronger because a HOTS Protoss wouldn't be 100% chrono boosting probes, whereas a LOTV Protoss is often times just 100% chronoboosting probes.
Meaning, yes, LOTV Protoss has an insane economy edge over HOTS Protoss...which is an imbalance...
People wanna keep ad hominem attacking without looking at data/gameplay? OK. I thought this was Teamliquid where people look at actual data/gameplay.
|
I'm not sure... are u trolling or u believe in what u've written Avilo? ;o
|
On June 22 2016 05:55 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2016 03:01 404AlphaSquad wrote:
How can a player of Avilos calibre believe the new chrono is stronger? Meaning, yes, LOTV Protoss has an insane economy edge over HOTS Protoss...which is an imbalance....
Aha, so you somehow play HoTS Terran vs. LotV Protoss? Or is this whole argument just another episode of "How it looks vs. How it feels"?
|
On June 22 2016 05:55 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2016 03:01 404AlphaSquad wrote:
How can a player of Avilos calibre believe the new chrono is stronger? Because it is objectively stronger? A few people were pointing out that the timer on HOTS was not updated to the LOTV timer. If that is true then the test i did still shows that LOTV chrono is stronger because a HOTS Protoss wouldn't be 100% chrono boosting probes, whereas a LOTV Protoss is often times just 100% chronoboosting probes. Meaning, yes, LOTV Protoss has an insane economy edge over HOTS Protoss...which is an imbalance... People wanna keep ad hominem attacking without looking at data/gameplay? OK. I thought this was Teamliquid where people look at actual data/gameplay.
That's a really bad argument. Protoss players in HotS choosing not to chrono probes 100% doesn't make that version of chrono worse. Or do you mean players with bad macro who forget to chrono? People not chronoing key structures still happens in LotV and it's still a big deal.
Plus the HotS chrono boost is just better the longer the game goes. In LotV you can chrono as many buildings as you have nexuses. In the late game in HotS you can boost 4 buildings for every nexus if you bank enough energy.
|
On June 22 2016 05:55 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2016 03:01 404AlphaSquad wrote:
How can a player of Avilos calibre believe the new chrono is stronger? Because it is objectively stronger? A few people were pointing out that the timer on HOTS was not updated to the LOTV timer. If that is true then the test i did still shows that LOTV chrono is stronger because a HOTS Protoss wouldn't be 100% chrono boosting probes, whereas a LOTV Protoss is often times just 100% chronoboosting probes. Meaning, yes, LOTV Protoss has an insane economy edge over HOTS Protoss...which is an imbalance... People wanna keep ad hominem attacking without looking at data/gameplay? OK. I thought this was Teamliquid where people look at actual data/gameplay.
This argument goes both ways: If that is true then the test i did still shows that HOTS chrono is stronger because a LOTV Protoss wouldn't be 100% chrono boosting probes, whereas a HOTS Protoss is often times just 100% chronoboosting probes.
This is a "Vacuous truth" falacy: A claim that is technically true but meaningless, in the form of claiming that no A in B has C, when there are no As in B. For example, claiming that no mobile phones in the room are on when there are no mobile phones in the room at all.
Saying in your opinion how you think people would not chrono probes as much is completely irrelvant to the fact that the average production boost with chrono is 15% in LOTV compared to the 22% of HOTS.
Since chrono boost is stronger in HOTS than it was in LOTV, you would see the exact same thing you're seeing now but worse if HOTS chrono was added in LOTV. Protoss would be able to get faster upgrades, have acess to more all ins, have the option of a better economy, etc than in lotv. Everything about HOTS chrono is better than LOTV unless you're new to the game and bank 200 nexus energy.
The fact is, if anyone were to chrono out probes with HOTS chrono it would be faster than it is in lotv. Avilo in your situation of saying that you think a protoss player would spend HOTS chrono energy on different things, does not change the outcome of what would actually happen if a protoss player spent all chrono energy on making probes.
|
On June 21 2016 22:50 Sholip wrote:
All that said, I don't think the new Chrono would be stronger than the old one. It can, however, be that T and Z got nerfed more heavily regarding economy, coming into LotV. This is something that may be worth looking into more deeply.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who would like this to be looked into (by you?)
|
On June 22 2016 06:57 Penev wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2016 22:50 Sholip wrote:
All that said, I don't think the new Chrono would be stronger than the old one. It can, however, be that T and Z got nerfed more heavily regarding economy, coming into LotV. This is something that may be worth looking into more deeply.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who would like this to be looked into (by you?)
Hmm, I will see what I can do. Problem is, it's not trivial how to compare the two economic systems. I think the cleanest would be to compare old Chrono vs. new Chrono, both starting with 6 workers. Then old MULE vs. new MULE, both with 6; and then old Larva vs. new Larva, with 6. Than look at which was nerfed more heavily. That way, you could see exactly the effect of the macro booster changes (and not the effects of the new economy, if any).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
