|
I'm not opposed to the idea of cancelling a command center in order to hold a push cleanly.
eco advantage is already the most significant variable in every other phase of the game. it is not fun to make eco advantage the deciding variable all the time. what about micro? tech? defender's advantage? terrain?
here's a rough idea of how I would like games to be decided
late-game:
33% eco advantage
33% multi-tasking
34% micro
mid-game:
30% eco advantage
30% multi-tasking
40% micro
early-game
20% eco advantage
30% multi-tasking
50% micro
in other words:
whoever has the biggest economy and best multi-tasking in the late-game usually wins.
whoever has the best micro in the early game usually wins.
in sc2, it is much too difficult to win a game from an economic disadvantage. I can only think of a few sc2 games where this actually happened... Mvp vs Innovation comes to mind, where Mvp lost all his workers early. I wish this was possible more often in sc2. the problem is the micro skill ceiling on many units is too low!
part of the reason why this isn't possible vP is because of marines, cyclones and ghosts.
marines are slow, too low range and need to be grouped in certain numbers to defeat certain units "cleanly". I don't see any reason why the game designers should make it possible to hold an all-in with marines as the core defense. they are clearly not suited for the task... all-ins should be held with stand-alone, highly microable high-tech units, not sheer numbers of inferior units.
there was a great degree of skill difference between a pro KR terran holding an all-in with lock-on cyclones vs a master league terran holding an all-in with lock-on cyclones.
there is a lesser degree of skill difference between a pro KR terran holding an all-in with typhoon blaster cyclones vs a master league terran holding an all-in with typhoon blaster cyclones.
lock-on cyclones were superior design because they were highly microable. kiting takes great care and attention... positional planning, tactile movements, re-positioning on-the-fly, blah blah blah. with typhoon blaster cyclones, half the battle is having the unit ready in the first place, having enough resources to repair it. micro is hardly a factor at all.
holding an all-in with lock-on cyclones required more skill, but the rewards for a perfect defense were greater.
first, you would keep auto-cast enabled for the first oracle swoop. then, you would disable auto-cast and make some important decisions about which target needs to go down first. I guess in most situations you would want the void ray to go down first.
typhoon blaster cyclones are unmicroable, 1-A, zero skill units. you just click attack, repair with SCVs, and let the numbers game play out. just imagine an upgraded mechanical marine which can't even be stuttered stepped. that's essentially what typhoon blaster is. it's fucking insulting that this junk unit is in the terran arsenal. hurr durr, terran needs an ez mode unit cuz the rest are so high skill. hmm, what unit can we fuck with this time? well nobody is using cyclones in patch 3.3 except early-game defense, so I guess let's ruin this unit! nobody's gonna miss it anyway! thanks david kim
I will never shut up about the old cyclone. it was one of the coolest units in the game. the only problem with the old lock-on cyclones was the cost / damage stats / tech-lab limitation. it could have easily been fixed without removing its micro potential!
as for ghosts... ghosts could aid in a perfect 1-base defense, but they cost too many minerals at present. glad that this is being fixed. ghosts would make for a great 1-base defense vs stargate / shield battery, thanks to EMP and P's limited detection. toss is fucked if they lose the oracle, no robo, no forge... cloak could do serious work.
superior micro toss 1-base all-in vs inferior micro 1-base terran defense = toss wins
average micro toss 1-base all-in vs average micro 1-base terran defense = terran advantage, but toss could still recover with good micro
inferior micro toss 1-base all-in vs superior micro 1-base terran defense = terran wins every time
that's how it should be in my mind. less about killing workers / denying mining for long enough, more about micro.
|
On November 19 2017 18:48 Charoisaur wrote:
Gumiho beat Serral at Blizzcon with Mech.
Serral used Swarmhosts.
And your point is?
|
On November 23 2017 17:17 QuinnTheEskimo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2017 18:48 Charoisaur wrote:
Gumiho beat Serral at Blizzcon with Mech.
Serral used Swarmhosts.
And your point is?
That it's possible to beat SH.
|
On November 23 2017 17:27 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2017 17:17 QuinnTheEskimo wrote:On November 19 2017 18:48 Charoisaur wrote:
Gumiho beat Serral at Blizzcon with Mech.
Serral used Swarmhosts.
And your point is? That it's possible to beat SH.
It is possible to beat anything. Does not mean it is balanced or good for the game.
|
On November 22 2017 06:25 nonoes wrote:I think terran player expect too much a no brainer safe fast expand build that could be safe against anything ( proxies) For example protoss has to cancel fast expand when they get 1-1-1 proxy by T ( at least korean pro are canceling it maybe there is another way i don't know) Assuming you cancel or don't make your cc at all after scouting double gaz you could afford 2 barracks + factory and deflect both immortals and oracles proxies
it's always been like this, even in blink all-in era it was possible to hold with cc 1st build, byun hold 2 proxy robo immortal all-in with cc 1st against Has himself lol.
|
On November 23 2017 17:27 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2017 17:17 QuinnTheEskimo wrote:On November 19 2017 18:48 Charoisaur wrote:
Gumiho beat Serral at Blizzcon with Mech.
Serral used Swarmhosts.
And your point is? That it's possible to beat SH.
And how does that help the discussion?
|
Anyone who says early PvT is balanced at the moment is either too blind to read the patch notes or too stupid to understand them. Or Protoss. Not that those are mutually exclusive.
Also, aligulac has the last two weeks of PvT at 58%.
|
On November 23 2017 18:08 pvsnp wrote:
Anyone who thinks early PvT is balanced at the moment is either too blind to read the patch notes or too stupid to understand them. Or Protoss. Not that those are mutually exclusive.
Also, aligulac has the last two weeks of PvT at 58%.
that's not so bad. my win-rate vP is 26% :D
|
On November 19 2017 17:52 MockHamill wrote:
Apart from balance I can not think of any unit that sucks they joy out of playing as much as seeing your opponent going Swarm Hosts and knowing that no matter what you do you will lose.
He said you can't win vs SHs. That's why I pointed out that Serral beat Gumiho.
|
And Serral is definitely as good as Gumiho....
|
On November 23 2017 18:08 pvsnp wrote:
Anyone who says early PvT is balanced at the moment is either too blind to read the patch notes or too stupid to understand them. Or Protoss. Not that those are mutually exclusive.
Also, aligulac has the last two weeks of PvT at 58%.
PvT is p favoured for two weeks. IMBALANCE
PvT is terran favoured for MONTHS. Let protoss figure it out.
One of the reason I absolutely hate terrans. We win? Good. We don't win 70% of the games? OP NERF PLS. What do you mean, we have to ADAPT? IMBA!
~~
|
On November 24 2017 01:14 OsaX Nymloth wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2017 18:08 pvsnp wrote:
Anyone who says early PvT is balanced at the moment is either too blind to read the patch notes or too stupid to understand them. Or Protoss. Not that those are mutually exclusive.
Also, aligulac has the last two weeks of PvT at 58%. PvT is p favoured for two weeks. IMBALANCE PvT is terran favoured for MONTHS. Let protoss figure it out. One of the reason I absolutely hate terrans. We win? Good. We don't win 70% of the games? OP NERF PLS. What do you mean, we have to ADAPT? IMBA! ~~
Well to be fair, pvt was never this much imbalanced.
|
On November 24 2017 01:19 Aegwynn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2017 01:14 OsaX Nymloth wrote:On November 23 2017 18:08 pvsnp wrote:
Anyone who says early PvT is balanced at the moment is either too blind to read the patch notes or too stupid to understand them. Or Protoss. Not that those are mutually exclusive.
Also, aligulac has the last two weeks of PvT at 58%. PvT is p favoured for two weeks. IMBALANCE PvT is terran favoured for MONTHS. Let protoss figure it out. One of the reason I absolutely hate terrans. We win? Good. We don't win 70% of the games? OP NERF PLS. What do you mean, we have to ADAPT? IMBA! ~~ Well to be fair, pvt was never this much imbalanced.
Actually...it has, and if you look on aligulac, you'll see that PvT has generally been T favoured since the beginning of WoL.There have been stretches where Protoss was favoured, but it's generally been T favoured, and also the peak of T or P being stronger has the T having larger and longer peaks of being favoured.
|
On November 24 2017 01:39 FrkFrJss wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2017 01:19 Aegwynn wrote:On November 24 2017 01:14 OsaX Nymloth wrote:On November 23 2017 18:08 pvsnp wrote:
Anyone who says early PvT is balanced at the moment is either too blind to read the patch notes or too stupid to understand them. Or Protoss. Not that those are mutually exclusive.
Also, aligulac has the last two weeks of PvT at 58%. PvT is p favoured for two weeks. IMBALANCE PvT is terran favoured for MONTHS. Let protoss figure it out. One of the reason I absolutely hate terrans. We win? Good. We don't win 70% of the games? OP NERF PLS. What do you mean, we have to ADAPT? IMBA! ~~ Well to be fair, pvt was never this much imbalanced. Actually...it has, and if you look on aligulac, you'll see that PvT has generally been T favoured since the beginning of WoL.There have been stretches where Protoss was favoured, but it's generally been T favoured, and also the peak of T or P being stronger has the T having larger and longer peaks of being favoured.
to be fair aligulac isn't very reliable. If you look at results http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Premier_Tournaments protoss has been heavily favored on 2015 hots, and slightly favored since lotv. I'm not sure what basis aligulac uses but it's hard to define if it's normal for one player to beat another.
Balance should be working like this : 2 player of equal game knownledge and mechanic should have the same chance to win. But since it's very hard to define ( or to me it's not that hard, but some may say i'm biased so w/e ) if a player is better mechanicly, then results should be a reliable tell of whether or not a race is balanced.
Also you may not be agree with this, but protoss has fairly easy game mechanics, which to me means it feels overly difficult to play against protoss, when you're anything under GM because, the smallest mistake will always result in a lose while the execution of what is killing you seems way more easy to do.
I'm not saying the game should be balanced for lower league, but don't throw thing like aligulac to tell the game is balanced ( or not ).
|
On November 24 2017 01:14 OsaX Nymloth wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2017 18:08 pvsnp wrote:
Anyone who says early PvT is balanced at the moment is either too blind to read the patch notes or too stupid to understand them. Or Protoss. Not that those are mutually exclusive.
Also, aligulac has the last two weeks of PvT at 58%. PvT is p favoured for two weeks. IMBALANCE PvT is terran favoured for MONTHS. Let protoss figure it out. One of the reason I absolutely hate terrans. We win? Good. We don't win 70% of the games? OP NERF PLS. What do you mean, we have to ADAPT? IMBA! ~~
zest and stats both admitted that pvt is P favoured right now, what else do you need.
|
Are people really complaining about win rates this soon after such a massive patch?
Come on people, the metagame is more then shaken up it's drastically changed, we probably have 6 months easily before win rates stabilize in any coherent fashion. The balance team seems on board with making good changes in a timely manner as well.
Oh and to the guy who informed me about the Infestor range nerf being for Infested Terrans, thank you! I still feel however that the Infestor was unjustifiably over nerfed in comparison to the High Templar which is well rounded and strong in all match ups.
- No burrow Fungal = good design change but it existed for a reason, and that's because Infestors are slow and vulnerable while the rest of the army is fast. High Templar are slow and vulnerable as well but the entire Protoss army is slow.
- No root = Also a good design change that probably should have been done years ago but it's still a nerf, I was expecting some type of damage increase to compensate.
- less radius = Just another nerf on the pile, why would the radius of Fungal need to be reduced if they already can't be burrowed and it doesn't root? This seems like a pointless nerf, Infestors are just as vulnerable as they have always been and now Fungal is randomly worse?
I just don't get it lol
|
Fungal radius will still be larger than it was pre-patch 4.0. You're still getting 27% more AoE for the loss of the root.
|
jpg, the pre-patch fungal radius was 2.0, so the current 2.25 is still a buff.
maybe it would be a good idea to reduce the infestor model size slightly.
|
|
|
On November 24 2017 03:29 bela.mervado wrote:
jpg, the pre-patch fungal radius was 2.0, so the current 2.25 is still a buff.
maybe it would be a good idea to reduce the infestor model size slightly.
To make emp better vs them?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
