On June 22 2016 07:20 kill3r_cro wrote: So to summize:
1. chrono boost was not nerfed as hard as terran and zerg macro mechanichs 2. it's autocast and doesnt require any skill (we seen how that worked out with zerg and how fast was that removed) 3. it arrives at zero seconds in game, while zerg and terran needs to unlock theirs macro boosters, we all know that macro advantage exponentaly grows through game 4. new expansions arrives macro booster ready, while terran needs to upgrade cc to oc and zerg need to get queen there or create one
gg
1; Percentage wise it was nerfed the most by far, but it was also probably less important (like a 10% nerf to mule would probably hurt more than a 10% nerf to chrono)
2; Had this discussion before. Still takes some skill, is awkward to use, many people asked for old chrono mechanic. This isn't particularly related to balance unless you want to talk about which races are harder to play and i think there are strong argument for Protoss being hard there (other races have like 1.5x stronger representation at high leagues)
Just percentage wise? We're talking about raw skill needed here. To say, "Still takes some skill", is rather dodgy. It is much less demanding in lotv than in hots. The fact that you can't admit it straight speaks volumes.
Here's what needs to happen, a bit higher "percentage", but maintain the same demand in attention as in hots.
Of course, most biased Protoss players can't accept that since that might mean they fall down in ladder ranks. But hey, who cares that playership and viewership for SC2 is getting smaller and smaller.
As posted earlier I still dont understand what actually makes up for LOTV Terran playing with lower supply compared to Protoss, when in HOTS it was the T beeing ahead in that regard. Tankivacs cant be the reason so only Liberator is left. It just feils weird seeing Terrans getting destroyed by warpgate armies.
I think we are really onto something strange here, when discussing this with others they have pointed out that adepts are allowing protoss to get away with more greedy builds but I disagree with them since terran's too have used somewhat more greedy builds in lotv, on the other hand the colosus nerf mitigates this effect of boosted protoss economy by preventing them from capitalizing on it as they could before. I think more experimentation is in order.
All of you people attacking avilo personally because you don't agree with him should really reconsider the way you communicate, it's honestly making me sick. He is making arguments and devoting his time to experimentation and you are ridiculing him...its really sad
edit: my terran mind automatically put this into a tvp perspective
I think the difference is probably due to the early game units and what long-term plans each race has in the current meta. HotS was all about strong Terran harass in the early game. It started with Hellbat drops and turned into mine drops later down the line. Protoss also had to get to splash damage as fast as possible in order to be able to compete with Terrans in the mid-game. The focus on tech and trying to make the first 2-3 bases safe against drops and other forms of harass meant that much less income could be diverted to army units. In LotV the roles are not only slightly reversed, Protoss does not have to tech up quite as fast as they used to be. With gateway armies being much more competitive and adept-based harass transitioning much smoother into a stable mid-game army composition, more ressources can be allocated to army instead of pure tech. Recently I have seen a lot of Terrans emphasize getting out Liberators and Siege Tanks quickly, which is the LotV equivalent of a HotS Protoss rushing Colossus or storm. That said, I haven't really noticed the Protoss being up 40 supply in the mid-game as Avilo has claimed... at least not in pro play. Looking at the most recent games in GSL and SSL, both races seemed to have been on par in terms of supply during the mid-game if neither side has taken huge losses early on.
At least that's the explanation I could come up with. There might be other things at work here as well, but I am by no means an expert on that.
We aren't bashing Avilo for the sake of bashing him or because it's fun to do so. I am doing it, because the things he says are plain stupid and there is no other way to describe it. The clings to his view of the world despite all the evidence stacked against it without actually providing any proof or examples of his own. His arguments are flawed and his test was an embarrassment. And instead of providing more and proper arguments and evidence to support his claim, all he does is repeat his points more fiercely or writing his buzzwords in caps without adding anything to it. It is impossible to have a civilized discussion with someone like that. To make matters worse, he is actively spreading misinformation, which is one of the worst things someone with an audience and some form of renown can do.
100 times this. In fact, in late HotS when pros opened 3gate blink/robo with a quick third and no upgrades, it was also common for Protoss to have a very high army supply in the midgame to hit a timing (i should know, it was the last guide i ever wrote for TL); the main difference was that the main fighting unit were a couple of Colossi instead of ugpraded Adepts; for example this game is actually fairly LotV-esque
Also, why the fuck are people complaining that Chrono takes less skill than in HotS (it does), when a) it was the developer's intent to move focus away from macro mechanics and b) inject is the same since it can be stacked rather than having to hit it perfectly every time? The community (and the general forum in particular) has always been quite biased against protoss because "zomg allins deathballs" but damn, we are reaching some serious levels of hyperboles here, especially when both two base timings and three base turtle are completely gone in LotV.
As posted earlier I still dont understand what actually makes up for LOTV Terran playing with lower supply compared to Protoss, when in HOTS it was the T beeing ahead in that regard. Tankivacs cant be the reason so only Liberator is left. It just feils weird seeing Terrans getting destroyed by warpgate armies.
I think we are really onto something strange here, when discussing this with others they have pointed out that adepts are allowing protoss to get away with more greedy builds but I disagree with them since terran's too have used somewhat more greedy builds in lotv, on the other hand the colosus nerf mitigates this effect of boosted protoss economy by preventing them from capitalizing on it as they could before. I think more experimentation is in order.
All of you people attacking avilo personally because you don't agree with him should really reconsider the way you communicate, it's honestly making me sick. He is making arguments and devoting his time to experimentation and you are ridiculing him...its really sad
edit: my terran mind automatically put this into a tvp perspective
I think the difference is probably due to the early game units and what long-term plans each race has in the current meta. HotS was all about strong Terran harass in the early game. It started with Hellbat drops and turned into mine drops later down the line. Protoss also had to get to splash damage as fast as possible in order to be able to compete with Terrans in the mid-game. The focus on tech and trying to make the first 2-3 bases safe against drops and other forms of harass meant that much less income could be diverted to army units. In LotV the roles are not only slightly reversed, Protoss does not have to tech up quite as fast as they used to be. With gateway armies being much more competitive and adept-based harass transitioning much smoother into a stable mid-game army composition, more ressources can be allocated to army instead of pure tech. Recently I have seen a lot of Terrans emphasize getting out Liberators and Siege Tanks quickly, which is the LotV equivalent of a HotS Protoss rushing Colossus or storm. That said, I haven't really noticed the Protoss being up 40 supply in the mid-game as Avilo has claimed... at least not in pro play. Looking at the most recent games in GSL and SSL, both races seemed to have been on par in terms of supply during the mid-game if neither side has taken huge losses early on.
At least that's the explanation I could come up with. There might be other things at work here as well, but I am by no means an expert on that.
We aren't bashing Avilo for the sake of bashing him or because it's fun to do so. I am doing it, because the things he says are plain stupid and there is no other way to describe it. The clings to his view of the world despite all the evidence stacked against it without actually providing any proof or examples of his own. His arguments are flawed and his test was an embarrassment. And instead of providing more and proper arguments and evidence to support his claim, all he does is repeat his points more fiercely or writing his buzzwords in caps without adding anything to it. It is impossible to have a civilized discussion with someone like that. To make matters worse, he is actively spreading misinformation, which is one of the worst things someone with an audience and some form of renown can do.
Bingo. There's a reason avilo is hated, well two actually but the one most people here have is he won't listen to reason, he won't ever admit that he's wrong and if he's called out on his bs he just rehashes the same bs but louder.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. If I were in charge of balance for Blizzard given his tantrums I'd take everything he asks for or suggests and do the EXACT opposite to it, because frankly the sooner his toxicity is out of our game, the better off everyone will be
As posted earlier I still dont understand what actually makes up for LOTV Terran playing with lower supply compared to Protoss, when in HOTS it was the T beeing ahead in that regard. Tankivacs cant be the reason so only Liberator is left. It just feils weird seeing Terrans getting destroyed by warpgate armies.
I think we are really onto something strange here, when discussing this with others they have pointed out that adepts are allowing protoss to get away with more greedy builds but I disagree with them since terran's too have used somewhat more greedy builds in lotv, on the other hand the colosus nerf mitigates this effect of boosted protoss economy by preventing them from capitalizing on it as they could before. I think more experimentation is in order.
All of you people attacking avilo personally because you don't agree with him should really reconsider the way you communicate, it's honestly making me sick. He is making arguments and devoting his time to experimentation and you are ridiculing him...its really sad
edit: my terran mind automatically put this into a tvp perspective
I think the difference is probably due to the early game units and what long-term plans each race has in the current meta. HotS was all about strong Terran harass in the early game. It started with Hellbat drops and turned into mine drops later down the line. Protoss also had to get to splash damage as fast as possible in order to be able to compete with Terrans in the mid-game. The focus on tech and trying to make the first 2-3 bases safe against drops and other forms of harass meant that much less income could be diverted to army units. In LotV the roles are not only slightly reversed, Protoss does not have to tech up quite as fast as they used to be. With gateway armies being much more competitive and adept-based harass transitioning much smoother into a stable mid-game army composition, more ressources can be allocated to army instead of pure tech. Recently I have seen a lot of Terrans emphasize getting out Liberators and Siege Tanks quickly, which is the LotV equivalent of a HotS Protoss rushing Colossus or storm. That said, I haven't really noticed the Protoss being up 40 supply in the mid-game as Avilo has claimed... at least not in pro play. Looking at the most recent games in GSL and SSL, both races seemed to have been on par in terms of supply during the mid-game if neither side has taken huge losses early on.
At least that's the explanation I could come up with. There might be other things at work here as well, but I am by no means an expert on that.
We aren't bashing Avilo for the sake of bashing him or because it's fun to do so. I am doing it, because the things he says are plain stupid and there is no other way to describe it. The clings to his view of the world despite all the evidence stacked against it without actually providing any proof or examples of his own. His arguments are flawed and his test was an embarrassment. And instead of providing more and proper arguments and evidence to support his claim, all he does is repeat his points more fiercely or writing his buzzwords in caps without adding anything to it. It is impossible to have a civilized discussion with someone like that. To make matters worse, he is actively spreading misinformation, which is one of the worst things someone with an audience and some form of renown can do.
100 times this. In fact, in late HotS when pros opened 3gate blink/robo with a quick third and no upgrades, it was also common for Protoss to have a very high army supply in the midgame to hit a timing (i should know, it was the last guide i ever wrote for TL); the main difference was that the main fighting unit were a couple of Colossi instead of ugpraded Adepts; for example this game is actually fairly LotV-esque
Exactly this, thank You.
We might say that Adepts in LotV somewhat replaces collosus in HotS. That's way most Protoss players skips AoE for long time and stay pure gateway, because adepts allow for trading efficiently vs bio similarly as collosus did.
The thing is no one has very accurately proved or disproved anything regarding this subject yet but Avilo is the only one to take the heat? Plain stupidity and sheep herd mentality.
On June 22 2016 19:02 VonComet wrote: The thing is no one has very accurately proved or disproved anything regarding this subject yet but Avilo is the only one to take the heat? Plain stupidity and sheep herd mentality.
Did you even read the OP and following posts that conclusively prove that Avilo is wrong (as he often is)?
On June 22 2016 07:20 kill3r_cro wrote: So to summize:
1. chrono boost was not nerfed as hard as terran and zerg macro mechanichs 2. it's autocast and doesnt require any skill (we seen how that worked out with zerg and how fast was that removed) 3. it arrives at zero seconds in game, while zerg and terran needs to unlock theirs macro boosters, we all know that macro advantage exponentaly grows through game 4. new expansions arrives macro booster ready, while terran needs to upgrade cc to oc and zerg need to get queen there or create one
gg
1; Percentage wise it was nerfed the most by far, but it was also probably less important (like a 10% nerf to mule would probably hurt more than a 10% nerf to chrono)
2; Had this discussion before. Still takes some skill, is awkward to use, many people asked for old chrono mechanic. This isn't particularly related to balance unless you want to talk about which races are harder to play and i think there are strong argument for Protoss being hard there (other races have like 1.5x stronger representation at high leagues)
Just percentage wise? We're talking about raw skill needed here. To say, "Still takes some skill", is rather dodgy. It is much less demanding in lotv than in hots. The fact that you can't admit it straight speaks volumes.
Here's what needs to happen, a bit higher "percentage", but maintain the same demand in attention as in hots.
Of course, most biased Protoss players can't accept that since that might mean they fall down in ladder ranks. But hey, who cares that playership and viewership for SC2 is getting smaller and smaller.
Calling someone else 'biased' while making the most bias most post in the universe.... whatever the irony is probably lost....
So what it comes down to is avlio and those who believe Protoss takes 'no skill', they think that any kind of buff to Protoss in any kind of avenue is disgusting... despite the actual nerfs LoTV Protoss has undergone in most other avenues. They seem to have blacked out the whole beta where it was specifically talked about reducing Potoss army and allin power in favor of macro.
'OMG guise did you REALISE that LoTV chronoboost is ACTUALLY a BUFF for bad players?! Holy fucking shit I'm 6 months into an expansion and I'm now only realizing that it's now EASIER for a Protoss to take an expansion!??? H-have you seen disiss?'
The entire main idea of LoTV.... to 'normalize' Protoss, reduce their allin and tech power in favor of more macro oriented play, that happened. We had sweeping nerfs to warp gate and robo units... which were then turned around and called 'buffs' and then nerfed further. Chrono was nerfed in a way that was not only especially detrimental to timings and upgrades but also to economy.... Unless you're like the typical HoTS Protoss and literally NEVER used it....so as avlio says it's actually a buff... face...palm.
Just percentage wise? We're talking about raw skill needed here. To say, "Still takes some skill", is rather dodgy. It is much less demanding in lotv than in hots. The fact that you can't admit it straight speaks volumes.
The 2nd idea was to reduce Protoss' '1A' effectiveness. Nerfs to the Collosus, introduction of the Disruptor.... there's no argument that LoTV Protoss has more micro than HoTS, but we still have people here who are living in the past, who will probably never acknowledged that Protoss takes any skill at all... 'I don't care about how many more spells you have to cast! Chronoboost is easier now! it needs the same amount of attention span as hots, Protoss can't have buffs'.
So after all that... the nerfing of army and tech pillars, basically getting what everyone wanted, an economy buff is, as avlio put in his original post 'an oversight' from Blizzard.....
You're about 8 months too late... and also completely wrong.
On June 22 2016 13:06 BronzeKnee wrote: Maybe he actually believes that Protoss players are so bad that we missed all our chronos in HOTS. Either way, the winrates don't bear out a huge imbalance so no matter how much "better" he says the new chrono is, it doesn't matter. And I still want my old chrono back, I was really good at spending it all.
This is the funniest thing to me.
Though I have no statistical evidence, I'd be willing to bet that a large majority of high-level (and even mid-level) Protoss would much prefer to have the flexibility, ease of use, and stack-ability of the HotS Chronoboost mechanic over the LotV mechanic.
A nerfed (to current levels) HotS chronoboost in LotV would be most welcome by a lot of Protoss players, I suspect.
Here's what the numbers would have to be to make them equivalent:
- HotS chronoboost restored in LotV (cast from Nexus, Nexus has 100 max energy, costs 25 energy to cast) - New chronoboost does 26.6625 (HotS) seconds of work over 20 (HotS) seconds (which effectively is a 14.99% boost, a very slight nerf from today's 15% boost)
And I'd love having that mechanic back instead of the clunky thing we've got now.
Continuous chronoboosting from saved chronos (on one or multiple nexii) would bring the boost up to a maximum of 33.3125% ... roughly a 1/3 (local) production boost could be afforded if a player scrimped and scrounged from earlier possible usages. HotS chrono would have been 50%, locally.
EDIT: The new chrono hover-text could read "boosts production by 33% for 20 seconds" or something similar.
On June 23 2016 00:51 Cyro wrote: I think so too. If you started the nexus with energy for 1 chrono then it would be even stronger in every way, as well as being better designed IMO.
I'd be ok with any (25 or less) amount of starting energy for the nexus. 0-24 would be a way to compensate for the possibility of early-chronoboosted tech (like oracles, or +1 & glaives).
On June 22 2016 17:02 deth wrote: The elephant in the room is photon overcharge: the reason protoss can saturate a 3rd incredibly quickly while still being safe against terran aggression.
Chronoboost is clearly worse in LotV than it was in HotS, but PO is unfathomably better... which goes against everything they were trying to achieve with it.
I remember one of the first times I played the HOTS beta, a Terran player built 3 raxes early and sent a one base stim timing at me while expanding. Those kind of builds took skill to hold in WOL, you had to scout it, build units and then micro well. But on that day all I had to do was press F and click on my Nexus. A little bit of me died that day, and my love for SC2 waned considerably. Photon Overcharge is so bad for the game.
You don't even have to scout so many early timings past WOL because Photon Overcharge is so strong.
And yes, PO is the reason Protoss can expand so quickly.
There's some stuff that does require scouting and good micro but it's more rare. You could say similar stuff about terran and zerg really; it's easy to defend more bases in LOTV. Zerg open blind 3 hatch before pool all of the time and you can't really do much about it.
That's just how LOTV was designed to be played. I didn't want either PO or chrono boost / mules if it was going to be optimal to expand so quickly but here we are
On June 22 2016 17:02 deth wrote: The elephant in the room is photon overcharge: the reason protoss can saturate a 3rd incredibly quickly while still being safe against terran aggression.
Chronoboost is clearly worse in LotV than it was in HotS, but PO is unfathomably better... which goes against everything they were trying to achieve with it.
without pylon overcharge liberator harass would be absurd
The comparison of the new chronoboost to the old chronoboost is fundamentally flawed. Macro mechanics were nerfed across the board and macro mechanic strength should be considered in that context because otherwise you're ignoring that your non-mirror opponents economies have been nerfed as well. A better question would be comparing the two mechanics according to the 'rules' of the lotv macro mechanics, that is the % reduction in strength being equal.
No matter what, chrono in lotv is weaker than in hots. That's just the nature of macro mechanics in void. The new mechanic could and from napkin math probably does lessen the impact of the nerf to chrono at least in terms of the economy.
The objections to passive vs active start aren't good assumptions either. Just like there was no form of compensation for terran orbital commands finishing later (and thus starting to generate energy later) there would likely be no form of compensation for protoss where it started with 25 energy or something.
Some people are still mixing up design vs balance as well.
----
Of course, most biased Protoss players can't accept that since that might mean they fall down in ladder ranks
Protoss is massively underrepresented at high masters through platinum level. What evidence are you using to claim that protoss is easier to play at the same level as the other races?
At masters and diamond worldwide there are ~4887 terrans, ~4534 zerg and ~3164 protoss by rankedftw.com 's numbers.
There is a lot of protoss hate around starcraft communities these days; i think it's both the most hated and least represented race. I would like to see some polls on the subject.
Of course, most biased Protoss players can't accept that since that might mean they fall down in ladder ranks
Protoss is massively underrepresented at high masters through platinum level. What evidence are you using to claim that protoss is easier to play at the same level as the other races?
At masters and diamond worldwide there are ~4887 terrans, ~4534 zerg and ~3164 protoss by rankedftw.com 's numbers.
There is a lot of protoss hate around starcraft communities these days; i think it's both the most hated and least represented race. I would like to see some polls on the subject.
I personally think the downfall of SC2 as a game (and a large reason why I stopped playing) is because of the "youtube generation" of screaming/acting like pewdiepie on stream has unfortunately given people like Avilo an opportunity to falsely label Protoss as an "easy" race to his wide range of (new to starcraft) followers, thus ruining any chance of any protoss having respect in the community. Unless you are a Korean BW player using protoss, good luck having anyone recognise your skill. People even consider MC and PartinG as "cheesers" because of their race, despite being easily the two most lethal decision-makers in the game and serious top 3 control. The community in this game is so brain-washed by listening to these attention-seeking twitch players who will say anything to get in the spotlight.
And of course, as I say to everyone who says Protoss is "ez mode".. if its so easy, why don't you play it and win a WCS with protoss??? (Talking mainly to the "pros" who complain, like Avilo for instance) - I know as a protoss player, I switched to terran and built mass marines everygame to get to GM in WoL, so why can't they all do it the other way around if its that easy?? And of course, everyone brings up the Scarlett-DRG game, but lets face it; Scarlett is the best foreigner since Elky; of course she can offrace with either terran or protoss and have a high percentage chance at winning anything.
I personally think the downfall of SC2 as a game (and a large reason why I stopped playing) is because of the "youtube generation" of screaming/acting like pewdiepie on stream has unfortunately given people like Avilo an opportunity to falsely label Protoss as an "easy" race to his wide range of (new to starcraft) followers, thus ruining any chance of any protoss having respect in the community. Unless you are a Korean BW player using protoss, good luck having anyone recognise your skill. People even consider MC and PartinG as "cheesers" because of their race, despite being easily the two most lethal decision-makers in the game and serious top 3 control. The community in this game is so brain-washed by listening to these attention-seeking twitch players who will say anything to get in the spotlight.
THANK YOU for writing this <3 I'm actively involved in starcraft for about 15 years now and I completely feel the same.
And it really hurts me to see how the general mind set has moved to whining instead of innovating trying and building your own game and play style.
On June 23 2016 16:17 TheWinks wrote: The comparison of the new chronoboost to the old chronoboost is fundamentally flawed. ... A better question would be comparing the two mechanics according to the 'rules' of the lotv macro mechanics, that is the % reduction in strength being equal.
The comparison is perfectly valid to disprove the claim mentioned in this thread that some people are making: "LotV chrono is better than HotS chrono." That claim is simply wrong.
While there may be more interesting questions (like who benefited the most from the 12-worker starts and macro nerfs), they simply aren't answered by this thread -- that doesn't make this thread worthless or flawed in any way. It just means that there are more interesting questions to ask.
Those questions, inevitably, are more difficult to answer than the claim addressed by this thread. So this thread provides a valuable service in disproving the initial claim that LotV Chrono is simply better.
More work could be done to discover the relationship between the nerfs and the new eco across all three races, but that will likely be the work of months (if not years) and come to a much more murky conclusion than "LotV Chrono is demonstrably worse than HotS Chrono." -- and, like others have mentioned, if there is a significant advantage to any particular race it certainly hasn't shown up in win-rates or representation yet so the analysis of "which race got it better" might not even be relevant.
On June 23 2016 16:17 TheWinks wrote: The comparison of the new chronoboost to the old chronoboost is fundamentally flawed. ... A better question would be comparing the two mechanics according to the 'rules' of the lotv macro mechanics, that is the % reduction in strength being equal.
More work could be done to discover the relationship between the nerfs and the new eco across all three races
You don't need a cross racial comparison to do that here, just an understanding that because everyone had their macro mechanics nerfed you should consider the mechanic change in that context. 6 trip mules were a better mechanic for terran than 9 trip mules because you never lost minerals on the return trip, but comparing the lotv 6 trip mules to the hots 9 trip mules would be silly. Sadly that change was reverted in beta for some reason.
EPT
