|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51475 Posts
Based on player feedback and our own internal testing, we are making the following balance changes to StarCraft II. You can read our latest Community update with explains our thoughts behind these decisions. After you’ve spent some time on the ladder, let us know what you think about these changes.
Protoss- Nexus - Chrono Boost strength reduced from 100% to 50% and duration per cast increased from 10 seconds to 20 seconds.
- Oracle - Build time reduced from 43 to 37 seconds.
- Disruptor - Purification Nova has a 1 second charge-up time before launch.
Terran- Widow Mine - Build time reduced from 28.6 to 21.4 seconds.
- Raven
- Anti-Armor Missile lock time reduced from 2.14 to 1.43.
- Anti-Armor Missile energy cost reduced from 125 to 100.
- Interference Matrix range increased from 8 to 9.
- Interference Matrix missile mover speed increased by 50%.
Multiplayer Maps- Blackpink LE – Added a jumpable platform to provide Terran players with an additional entry or exit for scouting.
- Catalyst LE – Decals and doodads were added to help highlight the Reaper jump location near the main base.
|
Is this identical to the last community feedback?
|
On December 19 2017 04:48 Haighstrom wrote:
Is this identical to the last community feedback?
Yes.
|
On December 19 2017 04:48 Haighstrom wrote:
Is this identical to the last community feedback?
Correct, This is the actual patch vs proposed changes
|
Interesting that this is happening on a Monday as compared to the normal Tuesday updates.
|
The lock down spell seems to have gone from useless to useful. The missile speed increase and 1 more range really made a difference.
|
Interesting how we had 50% chronoboost for as long as we want, and now we have for 20 secs.
|
On December 19 2017 05:48 Vorment wrote:
Interesting how we had 50% chronoboost for as long as we want, and now we have for 20 secs.
The nexus regens 1.4 energy per second * 20 seconds = 28 energy
So you have "as long as we want" (on one building) chronoboost.
|
Kinda like all changes, but i'm not sure it adresses bio vs P (being P myself)
Also, isn't late game Zerg a bit too powerful right now?
|
On December 19 2017 06:00 SilverBullet wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 05:48 Vorment wrote:
Interesting how we had 50% chronoboost for as long as we want, and now we have for 20 secs. The nexus regens 1.4 energy per second * 20 seconds = 28 energy So you have "as long as we want" (on one building) chronoboost.
First, don't lie, the energy regen is 0.7875 per second for LotV and this is true for all units and buildings (And when Nexus is boosted it's regenerates energy in slightly slower pace).
Secondly, chrono boost takes 50 energy for activation, not 25 as it used to be in WoL and HotS.
|
On December 19 2017 07:00 TheWildShooter wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 06:00 SilverBullet wrote:On December 19 2017 05:48 Vorment wrote:
Interesting how we had 50% chronoboost for as long as we want, and now we have for 20 secs. The nexus regens 1.4 energy per second * 20 seconds = 28 energy So you have "as long as we want" (on one building) chronoboost. First, don't lie, the energy regen is 0.7875 per second for LotV and this is true for all units and buildings (And when Nexus is boosted it's regenerates energy in slightly slower pace). Secondly, chrono boost takes 50 energy for activation, not 25 as it used to be in WoL and HotS.
wait what do you mean when nexus is boosted it regenerates energy in slightly slower pace? Is this true I thought if you boosted the nexus it was the same as if it was not boosted. honest question. Ive been playing this game for years and thought that nexus energy was the same with and without chrono. isnt this the case????
|
On December 19 2017 07:00 TheWildShooter wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 06:00 SilverBullet wrote:On December 19 2017 05:48 Vorment wrote:
Interesting how we had 50% chronoboost for as long as we want, and now we have for 20 secs. The nexus regens 1.4 energy per second * 20 seconds = 28 energy So you have "as long as we want" (on one building) chronoboost. First, don't lie, the energy regen is 0.7875 per second for LotV and this is true for all units and buildings (And when Nexus is boosted it's regenerates energy in slightly slower pace). Secondly, chrono boost takes 50 energy for activation, not 25 as it used to be in WoL and HotS.
If you're going to talk about the difference between LotV and WoL/HotS in this context of balance, you should also mention that all the macro mechanics were nerfed in LotV and Protoss is not (and should not be) an exception.
Yes, chrono is weaker then it was in the past. Yes, that is fine because everyone's macro mechanics are weaker.
|
On December 19 2017 06:00 SilverBullet wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 05:48 Vorment wrote:
Interesting how we had 50% chronoboost for as long as we want, and now we have for 20 secs. The nexus regens 1.4 energy per second * 20 seconds = 28 energy So you have "as long as we want" (on one building) chronoboost.
So i can cast chronoboost for 28 energy now? Ok...
|
Oh my that certainly was a big nerf to the disruptor. A lot of these changes look small on paper but this update feels quite impactful ingame.
|
Hmm... interesting to see how it will play out, I think the widow mine buff is a bit much though...
|
Disruptor change will at least give some time to react to those ridiculous warp prism driveby plays. Weren't looking at your army for one second? Say bye to 10+ supply of bio.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On December 19 2017 13:47 Hushfield wrote:
Disruptor change will at least give some time to react to those ridiculous warp prism driveby plays. Weren't looking at your army for one second? Say bye to 10+ supply of bio.
In PvT it goes both ways - e.g. ghosts.
|
On December 19 2017 04:48 Haighstrom wrote:
Is this identical to the last community feedback?
No that is not the same, they said they would not nerf the stalkers and they did not
|
On December 19 2017 17:53 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 13:47 Hushfield wrote:
Disruptor change will at least give some time to react to those ridiculous warp prism driveby plays. Weren't looking at your army for one second? Say bye to 10+ supply of bio. In PvT it goes both ways - e.g. ghosts.
False equivalence fallacy. EMP kills nothing on its own. Novas do. Mines would be closer at least, but even mines have to burrow and then can be easily cleaned up afterwards, two shortcomings that disruptors don't worry about. Before the nerf disruptor drops were ridiculous. .
Not like Protoss is short on splash either.
|
Hm this update is disappointing, the changes they made are nice but they won't fix TvP with them.
Unless Protoss is on 7 or more bases the Chrono Boost change don't affect how fast they can get their upgrades at all which means that the double forge + mass gateway style is exactly as strong as befor.
My prediction is, the proposed Stalker nerf will come with the next balance update.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On December 19 2017 18:18 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 17:53 deacon.frost wrote:On December 19 2017 13:47 Hushfield wrote:
Disruptor change will at least give some time to react to those ridiculous warp prism driveby plays. Weren't looking at your army for one second? Say bye to 10+ supply of bio. In PvT it goes both ways - e.g. ghosts. False equivalence fallacy. EMP kills nothing on its own. Novas do. Mines would be closer at least, but even mines have to burrow and then can be easily cleaned up afterwards, two shortcomings that disruptors don't worry about. Before the nerf disruptor drops were ridiculous. . Not like Protoss is short on splash either.
If I'm not looking at my army for a second and I lose all my shields and energy - then the army is effectively dead as Protoss relies on this. Thus we both have to watch the army all the time(or cheat EMP with the warp prism  ). While nova (and former kamikaze ball) is a BS unit which I hate it doesn't matter it's not happening the other way around. And I'm not saying it's exactly the same, but it's the same "you were not watching for a second now you will suffer" moment. SC2 has plenty of these and it's the Achilles heel of this game. Terrible terrible damage in a blink of an eye
|
On December 19 2017 19:23 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 18:18 pvsnp wrote:On December 19 2017 17:53 deacon.frost wrote:On December 19 2017 13:47 Hushfield wrote:
Disruptor change will at least give some time to react to those ridiculous warp prism driveby plays. Weren't looking at your army for one second? Say bye to 10+ supply of bio. In PvT it goes both ways - e.g. ghosts. False equivalence fallacy. EMP kills nothing on its own. Novas do. Mines would be closer at least, but even mines have to burrow and then can be easily cleaned up afterwards, two shortcomings that disruptors don't worry about. Before the nerf disruptor drops were ridiculous. . Not like Protoss is short on splash either. If I'm not looking at my army for a second and I lose all my shields and energy - then the army is effectively dead as Protoss relies on this. Thus we both have to watch the army all the time(or cheat EMP with the warp prism ). While nova (and former kamikaze ball) is a BS unit which I hate it doesn't matter it's not happening the other way around. And I'm not saying it's exactly the same, but it's the same "you were not watching for a second now you will suffer" moment. SC2 has plenty of these and it's the Achilles heel of this game. Terrible terrible damage in a blink of an eye
The other difference between EMP and Nova is that Nova also has to "travel" to it's target and being it quick fast it is still much slower than EMP.
Nova was instantaneous only with WP drop on top of enemy unit.
Still - whatever.
|
New Raven is useless, not sure theses buffs will be enough.
I am also wondering why they do not buff marauders or revert them as they were in Hots, and that way they could keep stalkers without nerfing them.
|
jesus christ the disruptor is garbage now
|
On December 19 2017 07:32 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 07:00 TheWildShooter wrote:On December 19 2017 06:00 SilverBullet wrote:On December 19 2017 05:48 Vorment wrote:
Interesting how we had 50% chronoboost for as long as we want, and now we have for 20 secs. The nexus regens 1.4 energy per second * 20 seconds = 28 energy So you have "as long as we want" (on one building) chronoboost. First, don't lie, the energy regen is 0.7875 per second for LotV and this is true for all units and buildings (And when Nexus is boosted it's regenerates energy in slightly slower pace). Secondly, chrono boost takes 50 energy for activation, not 25 as it used to be in WoL and HotS. If you're going to talk about the difference between LotV and WoL/HotS in this context of balance, you should also mention that all the macro mechanics were nerfed in LotV and Protoss is not (and should not be) an exception. Yes, chrono is weaker then it was in the past. Yes, that is fine because everyone's macro mechanics are weaker.
Chrono was always the weakest macro mechanic. A lot of balance changes have been pushed since WoL so it's not fair to make the conclusion that because Terran/Zerg macro mechanic is weaker and Protoss macro mechanic is stronger therefore Protoss is now imbalanced. I think it's cool that now like Terran and Zerg we have an impactful and meaningful macro mechanic that is also very thematic to Protoss.
|
On December 19 2017 19:18 MrWayne wrote:
Hm this update is disappointing, the changes they made are nice but they won't fix TvP with them.
Unless Protoss is on 7 or more bases the Chrono Boost change don't affect how fast they can get their upgrades at all which means that the double forge + mass gateway style is exactly as strong as befor.
My prediction is, the proposed Stalker nerf will come with the next balance update.
PvT win rates had fallen to well within the acceptable margin from Blizzard even before these nerfs. Sure, ~52.5% is still 7.5% higher than Terran players are used to, but Terran players will just have to learn to deal with it.
|
not the matter , the problem are stalkers ! Way too strong for the cost
|
stalkers are fragile units, and marauders chew threw em easy ... just like hots and wol.
|
On December 19 2017 21:49 bObA wrote:
New Raven is useless, not sure theses buffs will be enough.
I am also wondering why they do not buff marauders or revert them as they were in Hots, and that way they could keep stalkers without nerfing them.
People said the same thing about vipers at first.
Raven is now a support unit, you only build 1-3 max.
|
On December 19 2017 19:23 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2017 18:18 pvsnp wrote:On December 19 2017 17:53 deacon.frost wrote:On December 19 2017 13:47 Hushfield wrote:
Disruptor change will at least give some time to react to those ridiculous warp prism driveby plays. Weren't looking at your army for one second? Say bye to 10+ supply of bio. In PvT it goes both ways - e.g. ghosts. False equivalence fallacy. EMP kills nothing on its own. Novas do. Mines would be closer at least, but even mines have to burrow and then can be easily cleaned up afterwards, two shortcomings that disruptors don't worry about. Before the nerf disruptor drops were ridiculous. . Not like Protoss is short on splash either. If I'm not looking at my army for a second and I lose all my shields and energy - then the army is effectively dead as Protoss relies on this. Thus we both have to watch the army all the time(or cheat EMP with the warp prism ). While nova (and former kamikaze ball) is a BS unit which I hate it doesn't matter it's not happening the other way around. And I'm not saying it's exactly the same, but it's the same "you were not watching for a second now you will suffer" moment. SC2 has plenty of these and it's the Achilles heel of this game. Terrible terrible damage in a blink of an eye
You can't drop ghosts right next to Protoss army vaporize 10-15 supply of units than leave every 30 seconds or so. Fast dmg on fights is one thing fast repeatable destruction of army units is something that only the current disruptor and the old stealthed widow mine provided and the new disruptor did this way more reliably.
|
Definitely harder to play high
|
Another step in the right direction. Still not there though.
|
On December 19 2017 23:30 daam wrote:
not the matter , the problem are stalkers ! Way too strong for the cost
On December 19 2017 23:30 daam wrote:
not the matter , the problem are stalkers ! Way too strong for the cost
if, in fact, Stalkers and Marauders are correctly balanced in the game then its these kinds of arguments that actually make them very interesting, fascinating units.
they are so straightforward.. its not like they have these exotic spells that change the effectiveness of the unit... and it really shows that when Dustn Browder first designed the Stalker and Marauder he did a good job.
|
Can we discuss about tanks being way too strong ?
The damage is insane, they require no upgrade for siege and you can easily mass them...
Blinding cloud is nerfed, SH are now useless, mutas are not viable thx to thors being too strong ?
At least if they nerf thor splash and you can magic box again then revert WM nerf.
4M vs LBM was the best area.
|
On December 20 2017 02:06 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
and it really shows that when Dustn Browder first designed the Stalker and Marauder he did a good job.
It might be my nostalgia influencing me but I feel the game was in a flawed, yet really good state during the WOL beta. I miss those times.
|
On December 20 2017 05:43 Tyrhanius wrote:
Can we discuss about tanks being way too strong ?
The damage is insane, they require no upgrade for siege and you can easily mass them...
Blinding cloud is nerfed, SH are now useless, mutas are not viable thx to thors being too strong ?
At least if they nerf thor splash and you can magic box again then revert WM nerf.
4M vs LBM was the best area.
????
TvZ is in a good spot balance-wise atm. It's at 48% and has been slightly below 50% since Blizzcon, so slightly Zerg-favored but well within the bounds of a balanced matchup.
Tanks therefore, are balanced as part of that. Unless you amove into a siege line, Zerg does just fine against them. I suggest you focus on SH and Vipers to counter tanks. I trust Rogue and Dark over you, so I'll conclude that blinding cloud and locusts are not useless at all, and in fact extremely useful– potentially game-winning–counters. The standard strategy is to tech up to BLs. Rogue prefers to do a rapid-remax cycle, first hydras then banes then lings. If you don't like lategame, a very common trick that Dark likes is to go for a big ravager-ling timing at the Terran third. Either way, tanks–while strong–have very clear weaknesses/counters and thus need no changes.
Just recently, I watched Rogue play Inno on stream in a pair of grueling mech games. Both of them went late, both of them were really close, and both of them were incredibly sick to watch. Rogue barely won one, Inno barely won the other. While I do agree that 4M vs LBM is/was the pinnacle of TvZ and of SC2 as a whole, mech TvZ can also be pretty entertaining when the best of the best are playing.
I'd love to see 4M vs LBM come back, don't get me wrong. But that would require at least a hydra nerf, thor nerf, and WM revert, which would propagate into other matchups and probably wreck the balance completely. In any case, the balance team has bigger concerns right now with TvP and PvZ.
|
tanks are actually perfect after the most recent stalker buff.
|
On December 20 2017 07:03 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2017 05:43 Tyrhanius wrote:
Can we discuss about tanks being way too strong ?
The damage is insane, they require no upgrade for siege and you can easily mass them...
Blinding cloud is nerfed, SH are now useless, mutas are not viable thx to thors being too strong ?
At least if they nerf thor splash and you can magic box again then revert WM nerf.
4M vs LBM was the best area. ???? TvZ is in a good spot balance-wise atm. It's at 48% and has been slightly below 50% since Blizzcon, so slightly Zerg-favored but well within the bounds of a balanced matchup. Tanks therefore, are balanced as part of that. Unless you amove into a siege line, Zerg does just fine against them. I suggest you focus on SH and Vipers to counter tanks. I trust Rogue and Dark over you, so I'll conclude that blinding cloud and locusts are not useless at all, and in fact extremely useful– potentially game-winning–counters. The standard strategy is to tech up to BLs. Rogue prefers to do a rapid-remax cycle, first hydras then banes then lings. If you don't like lategame, a very common trick that Dark likes is to go for a big ravager-ling timing at the Terran third. Either way, tanks–while strong–have very clear weaknesses/counters and thus need no changes. Just recently, I watched Rogue play Inno on stream in a pair of grueling mech games. Both of them went late, both of them were really close, and both of them were incredibly sick to watch. Rogue barely won one, Inno barely won the other. While I do agree that 4M vs LBM is/was the pinnacle of TvZ and of SC2 as a whole, mech TvZ can also be pretty entertaining when the best of the best are playing. I'd love to see 4M vs LBM come back, don't get me wrong. But that would require at least a hydra nerf, thor nerf, and WM revert, which would propagate into other matchups and probably wreck the balance completely. In any case, the balance team has bigger concerns right now with TvP and PvZ.
do you happen to have any links for those games?
|
Seriously, does Blizzard even know about their game's state?
It is not far away from command & conquer full retard level anymore.
I don't know many guys, who do not wish to just delete and forget about SC2 altogether, which are no full noobs or total white knights.
As an older guy that plays since WC2 I was recently trying to have some fun with SC2 after a longer period of inactivity (~18 months?). Hence I logged myself into several RT 3on3 games. Halleluja.
I could not manage to play myself out of diamond 3 level for quite some time first. Meanwhiles I reached Diamond 2 level (3on3 RT, solo), which to a large degree is result from lucky random distributions and nothing else, that means I just got more lucky with team mates while my opponent's teams did not.
Ok lets end the funny stories and come to actual issues, to save my and your time:
1. Protoss air is too strong and dominates the whole meta in teamgames.
2. MM in SC2 (such as in HOTS) can not detect player strengths. Players are somewhat randomly distributed over the ranks. It means almost nothing, mostly it is an indicator of activity and the ability to abuse MM mechanics - not an indicator of skill.
3. Even if you are on a certain rank it means few for your matchmaking, hence ranks becomes completely meaningless. Playing 3on3 RT on master 1 gives you the same selection of players as playing on diamond 3 - 90% of times.
(note: all that is related to 3on3 and 4on4 RT with full random team only, not with max fixed mates + 1 random player).
1. Protoss air is too strong.
Carrier's interceptors follow units in range that move out of range way too long. Basically nothing can escape. Even hit and run units like mutas can't escape after hitting carriers, interceptors just a move behind them somehow and kill em over half map size or smth.
Emergency Fix:
Reduce interceptor log on by 67%
Step 2:
Play around with interceptor vs. armor interactions. E.g. give interceptors 2x3 dmg instead of 1x6 and add 2x1 so that it becomes 2x4. Add some armor to affected units like corruptors and reduce their health?
2. Random distribution of skill over the ranks.
Steps:
Determine player skill as a new variable, it is not represented by MMR.
1on1 = 50% 1on1 current + 50% 1on1 history
2on2 = 50% 1on1 + 50% 2on2
3on3 = 50% 1on1, 25% 2on2 + 25% 3on3
4on4 = 50% 1on1, 50/3% 2on2, 50/3% 3on3 + 50/3% 4on4
Add history of teammatches in case history of 1on1 has not enough data (not played or barely played):
Get a % relation of 1on1 to 2on2, 1on1 to 3on3 and 1on1 to 4on4 of each player in the brackets a) current season, b) 12 months, c) all-time. Inject into equations.
3. Random matchmaking:
Create matches amongst players who are similar through a system described before. Stop the matchmaking to believe a better player (lets say master 1) can or even wants to make up for a worse player (lets say gold) while playing against 2 mediocre opponents (lets say diamond). It is a reason for
the randomness as well.
Lets continue with few more funny stories:
I tried playing some protoss and was more successful than playing with my mainrace with only a-moving units around. You go instant air behind cannons + teammates every game. Basically it is enough to do one move with your either rays or fenixes (depending what you opted for) before carriers hit. That means you either a-move out with like 6-8 rays and kill one expansion of the opponent or important tech or units, or you bring down energy of like 10-12 fenixes to zero once while lifting random units. Your carriers arrive meanwhiles and you done mostly.
The randomness of games result from the randomness of team assembly (a system that does not work like the one I described above) combined with the randomness of distribution of skill. It is basically full random, nothing else. Hence I am on diamond 3 (3on3 in that case) just like the guy who got SC2 since free2play patch and system puts us on same skill level. Results are hyper frustrating for everyone I know.
Abuse: You can of course abuse the system with maxed fixed mates + one random mate. It is not my matter, I wanna see SC2 improve, what you deliver in MM is close to trash level.
Even if you manage to get a higher rank you get the same selection of players in your game. It is impossible to feel any fun with the game that way. My 4on4 RT rank is still on master 1 just like 18 months ago when I was #1 EU (I know, big gosu that I am) for several weeks. No matter 18 months ago or now, it does not make any difference in player selection if I play on my 3on3 RT diamond3 or my 4on4 RT master 1, it is the same random selection of players (master + gold = 2x diamond) with random distribution of skill (full noobs in diamond and masters, inactive or non abusers on lower ranks).
SC2 ist what you could call a failed state. Backing off, nuff said. HF flamers.
Edit: Forgot one thing.
I think protoss can get upgrades way too fast with chrono. Curren't patch wont help much I believe. 3 air dmg is there way too fast.
|
On December 20 2017 17:30 LSN wrote:
Seriously, does Blizzard even know about their game's state?
It is not far away from command & conquer full retard level anymore.
I don't know many guys, who do not wish to just delete and forget about SC2 altogether, which are no full noobs or total white knights.
As an older guy that plays since WC2 I was recently trying to have some fun with SC2 after a longer period of inactivity (~18 months?). Hence I logged myself into several RT 3on3 games. Halleluja.
I could not manage to play myself out of diamond 3 level for quite some time first. Meanwhiles I reached Diamond 2 level (3on3 RT, solo), which to a large degree is result from lucky random distributions and nothing else, that means I just got more lucky with team mates while my opponent's teams did not.
Ok lets end the funny stories and come to actual issues, to save my and your time:
1. Protoss air is too strong and dominates the whole meta in teamgames.
2. MM in SC2 (such as in HOTS) can not detect player strengths. Players are somewhat randomly distributed over the ranks. It means almost nothing, mostly it is an indicator of activity and the ability to abuse MM mechanics - not an indicator of skill.
3. Even if you are on a certain rank it means few for your matchmaking, hence ranks becomes completely meaningless. Playing 3on3 RT on master 1 gives you the same selection of players as playing on diamond 3 - 90% of times.
(note: all that is related to 3on3 and 4on4 RT with full random team only, not with max fixed mates + 1 random player).
1. Protoss air is too strong.
Carrier's interceptors follow units in range that move out of range way too long. Basically nothing can escape. Even hit and run units like mutas can't escape after hitting carriers, interceptors just a move behind them somehow and kill em over half map size or smth.
Emergency Fix:
Reduce interceptor log on by 67%
Step 2:
Play around with interceptor vs. armor interactions. E.g. give interceptors 2x3 dmg instead of 1x6 and add 2x1 so that it becomes 2x4. Add some armor to affected units like corruptors and reduce their health?
2. Random distribution of skill over the ranks.
Steps:
Determine player skill as a new variable, it is not represented by MMR.
1on1 = 50% 1on1 current + 50% 1on1 history
2on2 = 50% 1on1 + 50% 2on2
3on3 = 50% 1on1, 25% 2on2 + 25% 3on3
4on4 = 50% 1on1, 50/3% 2on2, 50/3% 3on3 + 50/3% 4on4
Add history of teammatches in case history of 1on1 has not enough data (not played or barely played):
Get a % relation of 1on1 to 2on2, 1on1 to 3on3 and 1on1 to 4on4 of each player in the brackets a) current season, b) 12 months, c) all-time. Inject into equations.
3. Random matchmaking:
Create matches amongst players who are similar through a system described before. Stop the matchmaking to believe a better player (lets say master 1) can or even wants to make up for a worse player (lets say gold) while playing against 2 mediocre opponents (lets say diamond). It is a reason for
the randomness as well.
Lets continue with few more funny stories:
I tried playing some protoss and was more successful than playing with my mainrace with only a-moving units around. You go instant air behind cannons + teammates every game. Basically it is enough to do one move with your either rays or fenixes (depending what you opted for) before carriers hit. That means you either a-move out with like 6-8 rays and kill one expansion of the opponent or important tech or units, or you bring down energy of like 10-12 fenixes to zero once while lifting random units. Your carriers arrive meanwhiles and you done mostly.
The randomness of games result from the randomness of team assembly (a system that does not work like the one I described above) combined with the randomness of distribution of skill. It is basically full random, nothing else. Hence I am on diamond 3 (3on3 in that case) just like the guy who got SC2 since free2play patch and system puts us on same skill level. Results are hyper frustrating for everyone I know.
Abuse: You can of course abuse the system with maxed fixed mates + one random mate. It is not my matter, I wanna see SC2 improve, what you deliver in MM is close to trash level.
Even if you manage to get a higher rank you get the same selection of players in your game. It is impossible to feel any fun with the game that way. My 4on4 RT rank is still on master 1 just like 18 months ago when I was #1 EU (I know, big gosu that I am) for several weeks. No matter 18 months ago or now, it does not make any difference in player selection if I play on my 3on3 RT diamond3 or my 4on4 RT master 1, it is the same random selection of players (master + gold = 2x diamond) with random distribution of skill (full noobs in diamond and masters, inactive or non abusers on lower ranks).
SC2 ist what you could call a failed state. Backing off, nuff said. HF flamers.
Edit: Forgot one thing.
I think protoss can get upgrades way too fast with chrono. Curren't patch wont help much I believe. 3 air dmg is there way too fast.
Just to make sure I get it right, you're actually proposing changes to the game based on a bunch of random team 3v3 games at diamond level ?
|
On December 20 2017 22:01 LoneYoShi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2017 17:30 LSN wrote:
Seriously, does Blizzard even know about their game's state?
It is not far away from command & conquer full retard level anymore.
I don't know many guys, who do not wish to just delete and forget about SC2 altogether, which are no full noobs or total white knights.
As an older guy that plays since WC2 I was recently trying to have some fun with SC2 after a longer period of inactivity (~18 months?). Hence I logged myself into several RT 3on3 games. Halleluja.
I could not manage to play myself out of diamond 3 level for quite some time first. Meanwhiles I reached Diamond 2 level (3on3 RT, solo), which to a large degree is result from lucky random distributions and nothing else, that means I just got more lucky with team mates while my opponent's teams did not.
Ok lets end the funny stories and come to actual issues, to save my and your time:
1. Protoss air is too strong and dominates the whole meta in teamgames.
2. MM in SC2 (such as in HOTS) can not detect player strengths. Players are somewhat randomly distributed over the ranks. It means almost nothing, mostly it is an indicator of activity and the ability to abuse MM mechanics - not an indicator of skill.
3. Even if you are on a certain rank it means few for your matchmaking, hence ranks becomes completely meaningless. Playing 3on3 RT on master 1 gives you the same selection of players as playing on diamond 3 - 90% of times.
(note: all that is related to 3on3 and 4on4 RT with full random team only, not with max fixed mates + 1 random player).
1. Protoss air is too strong.
Carrier's interceptors follow units in range that move out of range way too long. Basically nothing can escape. Even hit and run units like mutas can't escape after hitting carriers, interceptors just a move behind them somehow and kill em over half map size or smth.
Emergency Fix:
Reduce interceptor log on by 67%
Step 2:
Play around with interceptor vs. armor interactions. E.g. give interceptors 2x3 dmg instead of 1x6 and add 2x1 so that it becomes 2x4. Add some armor to affected units like corruptors and reduce their health?
2. Random distribution of skill over the ranks.
Steps:
Determine player skill as a new variable, it is not represented by MMR.
1on1 = 50% 1on1 current + 50% 1on1 history
2on2 = 50% 1on1 + 50% 2on2
3on3 = 50% 1on1, 25% 2on2 + 25% 3on3
4on4 = 50% 1on1, 50/3% 2on2, 50/3% 3on3 + 50/3% 4on4
Add history of teammatches in case history of 1on1 has not enough data (not played or barely played):
Get a % relation of 1on1 to 2on2, 1on1 to 3on3 and 1on1 to 4on4 of each player in the brackets a) current season, b) 12 months, c) all-time. Inject into equations.
3. Random matchmaking:
Create matches amongst players who are similar through a system described before. Stop the matchmaking to believe a better player (lets say master 1) can or even wants to make up for a worse player (lets say gold) while playing against 2 mediocre opponents (lets say diamond). It is a reason for
the randomness as well.
Lets continue with few more funny stories:
I tried playing some protoss and was more successful than playing with my mainrace with only a-moving units around. You go instant air behind cannons + teammates every game. Basically it is enough to do one move with your either rays or fenixes (depending what you opted for) before carriers hit. That means you either a-move out with like 6-8 rays and kill one expansion of the opponent or important tech or units, or you bring down energy of like 10-12 fenixes to zero once while lifting random units. Your carriers arrive meanwhiles and you done mostly.
The randomness of games result from the randomness of team assembly (a system that does not work like the one I described above) combined with the randomness of distribution of skill. It is basically full random, nothing else. Hence I am on diamond 3 (3on3 in that case) just like the guy who got SC2 since free2play patch and system puts us on same skill level. Results are hyper frustrating for everyone I know.
Abuse: You can of course abuse the system with maxed fixed mates + one random mate. It is not my matter, I wanna see SC2 improve, what you deliver in MM is close to trash level.
Even if you manage to get a higher rank you get the same selection of players in your game. It is impossible to feel any fun with the game that way. My 4on4 RT rank is still on master 1 just like 18 months ago when I was #1 EU (I know, big gosu that I am) for several weeks. No matter 18 months ago or now, it does not make any difference in player selection if I play on my 3on3 RT diamond3 or my 4on4 RT master 1, it is the same random selection of players (master + gold = 2x diamond) with random distribution of skill (full noobs in diamond and masters, inactive or non abusers on lower ranks).
SC2 ist what you could call a failed state. Backing off, nuff said. HF flamers.
Edit: Forgot one thing.
I think protoss can get upgrades way too fast with chrono. Curren't patch wont help much I believe. 3 air dmg is there way too fast. Just to make sure I get it right, you're actually proposing changes to the game based on a bunch on random team 3v3 games at diamond level ?
Well to be fair Carriers are too strong in 1v1 too. But they are completly OP in team games and basically wreck team game experiences.
Since Carriers are too strong in TvP, ZvP and even PvP plus completly broken in team games I think this should be the next thing Blizzard looks at.
|
roflmao 1 second delay, might as well be 1 million
|
On December 20 2017 05:43 Tyrhanius wrote:
Can we discuss about tanks being way too strong ?
The damage is insane, they require no upgrade for siege and you can easily mass them...
Blinding cloud is nerfed, SH are now useless, mutas are not viable thx to thors being too strong ?
At least if they nerf thor splash and you can magic box again then revert WM nerf.
4M vs LBM was the best area.
i like the Tank being strong. i think Blizzard should leave the Tank alone. the Tank is great as it is right now.
|
On December 20 2017 23:04 MockHamill wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2017 22:01 LoneYoShi wrote:On December 20 2017 17:30 LSN wrote:
Seriously, does Blizzard even know about their game's state?
It is not far away from command & conquer full retard level anymore.
I don't know many guys, who do not wish to just delete and forget about SC2 altogether, which are no full noobs or total white knights.
As an older guy that plays since WC2 I was recently trying to have some fun with SC2 after a longer period of inactivity (~18 months?). Hence I logged myself into several RT 3on3 games. Halleluja.
I could not manage to play myself out of diamond 3 level for quite some time first. Meanwhiles I reached Diamond 2 level (3on3 RT, solo), which to a large degree is result from lucky random distributions and nothing else, that means I just got more lucky with team mates while my opponent's teams did not.
Ok lets end the funny stories and come to actual issues, to save my and your time:
1. Protoss air is too strong and dominates the whole meta in teamgames.
2. MM in SC2 (such as in HOTS) can not detect player strengths. Players are somewhat randomly distributed over the ranks. It means almost nothing, mostly it is an indicator of activity and the ability to abuse MM mechanics - not an indicator of skill.
3. Even if you are on a certain rank it means few for your matchmaking, hence ranks becomes completely meaningless. Playing 3on3 RT on master 1 gives you the same selection of players as playing on diamond 3 - 90% of times.
(note: all that is related to 3on3 and 4on4 RT with full random team only, not with max fixed mates + 1 random player).
1. Protoss air is too strong.
Carrier's interceptors follow units in range that move out of range way too long. Basically nothing can escape. Even hit and run units like mutas can't escape after hitting carriers, interceptors just a move behind them somehow and kill em over half map size or smth.
Emergency Fix:
Reduce interceptor log on by 67%
Step 2:
Play around with interceptor vs. armor interactions. E.g. give interceptors 2x3 dmg instead of 1x6 and add 2x1 so that it becomes 2x4. Add some armor to affected units like corruptors and reduce their health?
2. Random distribution of skill over the ranks.
Steps:
Determine player skill as a new variable, it is not represented by MMR.
1on1 = 50% 1on1 current + 50% 1on1 history
2on2 = 50% 1on1 + 50% 2on2
3on3 = 50% 1on1, 25% 2on2 + 25% 3on3
4on4 = 50% 1on1, 50/3% 2on2, 50/3% 3on3 + 50/3% 4on4
Add history of teammatches in case history of 1on1 has not enough data (not played or barely played):
Get a % relation of 1on1 to 2on2, 1on1 to 3on3 and 1on1 to 4on4 of each player in the brackets a) current season, b) 12 months, c) all-time. Inject into equations.
3. Random matchmaking:
Create matches amongst players who are similar through a system described before. Stop the matchmaking to believe a better player (lets say master 1) can or even wants to make up for a worse player (lets say gold) while playing against 2 mediocre opponents (lets say diamond). It is a reason for
the randomness as well.
Lets continue with few more funny stories:
I tried playing some protoss and was more successful than playing with my mainrace with only a-moving units around. You go instant air behind cannons + teammates every game. Basically it is enough to do one move with your either rays or fenixes (depending what you opted for) before carriers hit. That means you either a-move out with like 6-8 rays and kill one expansion of the opponent or important tech or units, or you bring down energy of like 10-12 fenixes to zero once while lifting random units. Your carriers arrive meanwhiles and you done mostly.
The randomness of games result from the randomness of team assembly (a system that does not work like the one I described above) combined with the randomness of distribution of skill. It is basically full random, nothing else. Hence I am on diamond 3 (3on3 in that case) just like the guy who got SC2 since free2play patch and system puts us on same skill level. Results are hyper frustrating for everyone I know.
Abuse: You can of course abuse the system with maxed fixed mates + one random mate. It is not my matter, I wanna see SC2 improve, what you deliver in MM is close to trash level.
Even if you manage to get a higher rank you get the same selection of players in your game. It is impossible to feel any fun with the game that way. My 4on4 RT rank is still on master 1 just like 18 months ago when I was #1 EU (I know, big gosu that I am) for several weeks. No matter 18 months ago or now, it does not make any difference in player selection if I play on my 3on3 RT diamond3 or my 4on4 RT master 1, it is the same random selection of players (master + gold = 2x diamond) with random distribution of skill (full noobs in diamond and masters, inactive or non abusers on lower ranks).
SC2 ist what you could call a failed state. Backing off, nuff said. HF flamers.
Edit: Forgot one thing.
I think protoss can get upgrades way too fast with chrono. Curren't patch wont help much I believe. 3 air dmg is there way too fast. Just to make sure I get it right, you're actually proposing changes to the game based on a bunch on random team 3v3 games at diamond level ? Well to be fair Carriers are too strong in 1v1 too. But they are completly OP in team games and basically wreck team game experiences. Since Carriers are too strong in TvP, ZvP and even PvP plus completly broken in team games I think this should be the next thing Blizzard looks at.
Well to be fair, every protoss units are OP!
Is there any protoss units that are not OP?
People has been complaining for ages about zealots (yes you read it right, zealots), sentries, stalkers, adepts, warp prism, immortals, collosus, disruptor, phoenixes, oracles, void rays, carriers, tempests, dark templars, high templars, archons, mothership core & mothership.
Yet the balance team has done nothing to address that. These bunch of slackers deserved to be fired.
|
On December 20 2017 17:30 LSN wrote:
Seriously, does Blizzard even know about their game's state?
It is not far away from command & conquer full retard level anymore.
I don't know many guys, who do not wish to just delete and forget about SC2 altogether, which are no full noobs or total white knights.
As an older guy that plays since WC2 I was recently trying to have some fun with SC2 after a longer period of inactivity (~18 months?). Hence I logged myself into several RT 3on3 games. Halleluja.
I could not manage to play myself out of diamond 3 level for quite some time first. Meanwhiles I reached Diamond 2 level (3on3 RT, solo), which to a large degree is result from lucky random distributions and nothing else, that means I just got more lucky with team mates while my opponent's teams did not.
Ok lets end the funny stories and come to actual issues, to save my and your time:
1. Protoss air is too strong and dominates the whole meta in teamgames.
2. MM in SC2 (such as in HOTS) can not detect player strengths. Players are somewhat randomly distributed over the ranks. It means almost nothing, mostly it is an indicator of activity and the ability to abuse MM mechanics - not an indicator of skill.
3. Even if you are on a certain rank it means few for your matchmaking, hence ranks becomes completely meaningless. Playing 3on3 RT on master 1 gives you the same selection of players as playing on diamond 3 - 90% of times.
(note: all that is related to 3on3 and 4on4 RT with full random team only, not with max fixed mates + 1 random player).
1. Protoss air is too strong.
Carrier's interceptors follow units in range that move out of range way too long. Basically nothing can escape. Even hit and run units like mutas can't escape after hitting carriers, interceptors just a move behind them somehow and kill em over half map size or smth.
Emergency Fix:
Reduce interceptor log on by 67%
Step 2:
Play around with interceptor vs. armor interactions. E.g. give interceptors 2x3 dmg instead of 1x6 and add 2x1 so that it becomes 2x4. Add some armor to affected units like corruptors and reduce their health?
2. Random distribution of skill over the ranks.
Steps:
Determine player skill as a new variable, it is not represented by MMR.
1on1 = 50% 1on1 current + 50% 1on1 history
2on2 = 50% 1on1 + 50% 2on2
3on3 = 50% 1on1, 25% 2on2 + 25% 3on3
4on4 = 50% 1on1, 50/3% 2on2, 50/3% 3on3 + 50/3% 4on4
Add history of teammatches in case history of 1on1 has not enough data (not played or barely played):
Get a % relation of 1on1 to 2on2, 1on1 to 3on3 and 1on1 to 4on4 of each player in the brackets a) current season, b) 12 months, c) all-time. Inject into equations.
3. Random matchmaking:
Create matches amongst players who are similar through a system described before. Stop the matchmaking to believe a better player (lets say master 1) can or even wants to make up for a worse player (lets say gold) while playing against 2 mediocre opponents (lets say diamond). It is a reason for
the randomness as well.
Lets continue with few more funny stories:
I tried playing some protoss and was more successful than playing with my mainrace with only a-moving units around. You go instant air behind cannons + teammates every game. Basically it is enough to do one move with your either rays or fenixes (depending what you opted for) before carriers hit. That means you either a-move out with like 6-8 rays and kill one expansion of the opponent or important tech or units, or you bring down energy of like 10-12 fenixes to zero once while lifting random units. Your carriers arrive meanwhiles and you done mostly.
The randomness of games result from the randomness of team assembly (a system that does not work like the one I described above) combined with the randomness of distribution of skill. It is basically full random, nothing else. Hence I am on diamond 3 (3on3 in that case) just like the guy who got SC2 since free2play patch and system puts us on same skill level. Results are hyper frustrating for everyone I know.
Abuse: You can of course abuse the system with maxed fixed mates + one random mate. It is not my matter, I wanna see SC2 improve, what you deliver in MM is close to trash level.
Even if you manage to get a higher rank you get the same selection of players in your game. It is impossible to feel any fun with the game that way. My 4on4 RT rank is still on master 1 just like 18 months ago when I was #1 EU (I know, big gosu that I am) for several weeks. No matter 18 months ago or now, it does not make any difference in player selection if I play on my 3on3 RT diamond3 or my 4on4 RT master 1, it is the same random selection of players (master + gold = 2x diamond) with random distribution of skill (full noobs in diamond and masters, inactive or non abusers on lower ranks).
SC2 ist what you could call a failed state. Backing off, nuff said. HF flamers.
Edit: Forgot one thing.
I think protoss can get upgrades way too fast with chrono. Curren't patch wont help much I believe. 3 air dmg is there way too fast.
You can't balance the whole game around team games, but I would like to see at some point in the future a separate balance for team games. Right now it would be as simple as nerfing the capital ships. Team games have been consistently enjoyable for me for the entirety of SC2, which is much more than I can say for 1v1.
Team games were Co-op before there was Co-op.
|
On December 21 2017 01:16 fx9 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2017 23:04 MockHamill wrote:On December 20 2017 22:01 LoneYoShi wrote:On December 20 2017 17:30 LSN wrote:
Seriously, does Blizzard even know about their game's state?
It is not far away from command & conquer full retard level anymore.
I don't know many guys, who do not wish to just delete and forget about SC2 altogether, which are no full noobs or total white knights.
As an older guy that plays since WC2 I was recently trying to have some fun with SC2 after a longer period of inactivity (~18 months?). Hence I logged myself into several RT 3on3 games. Halleluja.
I could not manage to play myself out of diamond 3 level for quite some time first. Meanwhiles I reached Diamond 2 level (3on3 RT, solo), which to a large degree is result from lucky random distributions and nothing else, that means I just got more lucky with team mates while my opponent's teams did not.
Ok lets end the funny stories and come to actual issues, to save my and your time:
1. Protoss air is too strong and dominates the whole meta in teamgames.
2. MM in SC2 (such as in HOTS) can not detect player strengths. Players are somewhat randomly distributed over the ranks. It means almost nothing, mostly it is an indicator of activity and the ability to abuse MM mechanics - not an indicator of skill.
3. Even if you are on a certain rank it means few for your matchmaking, hence ranks becomes completely meaningless. Playing 3on3 RT on master 1 gives you the same selection of players as playing on diamond 3 - 90% of times.
(note: all that is related to 3on3 and 4on4 RT with full random team only, not with max fixed mates + 1 random player).
1. Protoss air is too strong.
Carrier's interceptors follow units in range that move out of range way too long. Basically nothing can escape. Even hit and run units like mutas can't escape after hitting carriers, interceptors just a move behind them somehow and kill em over half map size or smth.
Emergency Fix:
Reduce interceptor log on by 67%
Step 2:
Play around with interceptor vs. armor interactions. E.g. give interceptors 2x3 dmg instead of 1x6 and add 2x1 so that it becomes 2x4. Add some armor to affected units like corruptors and reduce their health?
2. Random distribution of skill over the ranks.
Steps:
Determine player skill as a new variable, it is not represented by MMR.
1on1 = 50% 1on1 current + 50% 1on1 history
2on2 = 50% 1on1 + 50% 2on2
3on3 = 50% 1on1, 25% 2on2 + 25% 3on3
4on4 = 50% 1on1, 50/3% 2on2, 50/3% 3on3 + 50/3% 4on4
Add history of teammatches in case history of 1on1 has not enough data (not played or barely played):
Get a % relation of 1on1 to 2on2, 1on1 to 3on3 and 1on1 to 4on4 of each player in the brackets a) current season, b) 12 months, c) all-time. Inject into equations.
3. Random matchmaking:
Create matches amongst players who are similar through a system described before. Stop the matchmaking to believe a better player (lets say master 1) can or even wants to make up for a worse player (lets say gold) while playing against 2 mediocre opponents (lets say diamond). It is a reason for
the randomness as well.
Lets continue with few more funny stories:
I tried playing some protoss and was more successful than playing with my mainrace with only a-moving units around. You go instant air behind cannons + teammates every game. Basically it is enough to do one move with your either rays or fenixes (depending what you opted for) before carriers hit. That means you either a-move out with like 6-8 rays and kill one expansion of the opponent or important tech or units, or you bring down energy of like 10-12 fenixes to zero once while lifting random units. Your carriers arrive meanwhiles and you done mostly.
The randomness of games result from the randomness of team assembly (a system that does not work like the one I described above) combined with the randomness of distribution of skill. It is basically full random, nothing else. Hence I am on diamond 3 (3on3 in that case) just like the guy who got SC2 since free2play patch and system puts us on same skill level. Results are hyper frustrating for everyone I know.
Abuse: You can of course abuse the system with maxed fixed mates + one random mate. It is not my matter, I wanna see SC2 improve, what you deliver in MM is close to trash level.
Even if you manage to get a higher rank you get the same selection of players in your game. It is impossible to feel any fun with the game that way. My 4on4 RT rank is still on master 1 just like 18 months ago when I was #1 EU (I know, big gosu that I am) for several weeks. No matter 18 months ago or now, it does not make any difference in player selection if I play on my 3on3 RT diamond3 or my 4on4 RT master 1, it is the same random selection of players (master + gold = 2x diamond) with random distribution of skill (full noobs in diamond and masters, inactive or non abusers on lower ranks).
SC2 ist what you could call a failed state. Backing off, nuff said. HF flamers.
Edit: Forgot one thing.
I think protoss can get upgrades way too fast with chrono. Curren't patch wont help much I believe. 3 air dmg is there way too fast. Just to make sure I get it right, you're actually proposing changes to the game based on a bunch on random team 3v3 games at diamond level ? Well to be fair Carriers are too strong in 1v1 too. But they are completly OP in team games and basically wreck team game experiences. Since Carriers are too strong in TvP, ZvP and even PvP plus completly broken in team games I think this should be the next thing Blizzard looks at. Well to be fair, every protoss units are OP! Is there any protoss units that are not OP? People has been complaining for ages about zealots (yes you read it right, zealots), sentries, stalkers, adepts, warp prism, immortals, collosus, disruptor, phoenixes, oracles, void rays, carriers, tempests, dark templars, high templars, archons, mothership core & mothership. Yet the balance team has done nothing to address that. These bunch of slackers deserved to be fired.
Also Marines, Marauders, Reapers, Ghosts, Tanks, Hellions, Hellbats, thors, Cyclones, widow mines, Vikings, Medivacs, Raven, Battlecruiser, Mules, PFs. All complained about. Must all be nerfed.
|
On December 20 2017 22:01 LoneYoShi wrote:
Just to make sure I get it right, you're actually proposing changes to the game based on a bunch on random team 3v3 games at diamond level ?
Yes.
Well I could mention that I stopped playing 1on1 18 months ago cause carrier play was the thing then already and hence ZvT and ZvP was no fun anymore and only limited to execution instead of strategical variety. I think that goes along with that.
But lets get back to 3on3. It is completely retarded and in an absolute unbearable state (4v4 the same). You basically play against the carrier timer from the beginning in every single game. Gameplay has never been that narrow before. Is SC2 a worth to play that way? I don't believe so, and I think from the feedback that I got that 90% of people see it the same way.
Some exceptions always there ofc. People who don't like change in general, people who lack vision and imagination that as well 1on1 could benefit from changes in that department.
Edit:
BTW: If you had read my text and understood the matter, you would know there are only 3on3s on diamond level basically. Due to the lack of players MM mixes up masters with gold to play vs. diamond mostly with a few exceptions during prime times and lucky seeding.
|
The disruptor delay is just silly. They should just have lowered the speed of the projectile a little to allow for the opponent to micro and absorb shots. 1 sec delay makes the disruptor extremely wacky to use and fight against.
|
On December 21 2017 03:14 JackONeill wrote:
The disruptor delay is just silly. They should just have lowered the speed of the projectile a little to allow for the opponent to micro and absorb shots. 1 sec delay makes the disruptor extremely wacky to use and fight against.
Well the problem they're trying to fix is disruptors being dropped right onto mineral lines and armies blowing stuff up point blank with no reaction time, so changing the speed wouldn''t help against that.
Another option would be to have the damage scale with time (starting at a low number and increasing to max damage over the next two seconds) though it could lead to some wacky unit dynamics with lings and blink stalkers.
|
On December 21 2017 03:14 JackONeill wrote:
The disruptor delay is just silly. They should just have lowered the speed of the projectile a little to allow for the opponent to micro and absorb shots. 1 sec delay makes the disruptor extremely wacky to use and fight against.
With no delay you can drop it over a mineral line and it detonate instantly I think? Projectile speed wouldn't solve that
|
On December 21 2017 03:20 Fango wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 03:14 JackONeill wrote:
The disruptor delay is just silly. They should just have lowered the speed of the projectile a little to allow for the opponent to micro and absorb shots. 1 sec delay makes the disruptor extremely wacky to use and fight against. With no delay you can drop it over a mineral line and it detonate instantly I think? Projectile speed wouldn't solve that
On December 21 2017 03:19 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 03:14 JackONeill wrote:
The disruptor delay is just silly. They should just have lowered the speed of the projectile a little to allow for the opponent to micro and absorb shots. 1 sec delay makes the disruptor extremely wacky to use and fight against. Well the problem they're trying to fix is disruptors being dropped right onto mineral lines and armies blowing stuff up point blank with no reaction time, so changing the speed wouldn''t help against that. Another option would be to have the damage scale with time (starting at a low number and increasing to max damage over the next two seconds) though it could lead to some wacky unit dynamics with lings and blink stalkers.
Yeah that's more of an issue with the warp prism than with the disruptor i think. With 6 pickup range and the insane speed the upgrade gives it.
Maybe nerfing the disruptor's health and giving it a very small delay ? I don't know. Trying to save the horrible design of this unit appears more and more like a lost cause.
|
On December 21 2017 01:34 Ransomstarcraft wrote:
You can't balance the whole game around team games, but I would like to see at some point in the future a separate balance for team games. Right now it would be as simple as nerfing the capital ships. Team games have been consistently enjoyable for me for the entirety of SC2, which is much more than I can say for 1v1.
Team games were Co-op before there was Co-op.
i have a 2v2 player partner. she and i have been playing together for 5+ years.
there is nothing like me directing a double team attack an opponent's natural and she says to me "how much of my army do you want?"
and i ping the map and yell ... " that is a ledge we will die on!!! "
i'd love it if they could separately balance team games, however, i suspect they do not have the resources.
|
Stalker/distruptor doesn't feel as viable in PvP with the 1 second delay
|
On December 21 2017 05:22 RaNgeD wrote:
Stalker/distruptor doesn't feel as viable in PvP with the 1 second delay
What.A.Shame.
|
Has there ever been a point in time when people were happy with the disruptor?
Because all I heard pre-4.0 was "game-ending moments" and "R E L I A B L E" jokes, and all I hear now is "pre-4.0 was better." Even in the beta they needed a lot of tweaking and a redesign.
And it's not like Protoss is short on splash. What's wrong with just using Colossi or Templar? Seems like everyone is happier without disruptors in the picture at all. Not every unit in the game has to be built every game. I don't see any problem with restricting disruptors to their own niche.
|
United States1823 Posts
On December 21 2017 06:20 pvsnp wrote:
Has there ever been a point in time when people were happy with the disruptor?
Because all I heard pre-4.0 was "game-ending moments" and "R E L I A B L E" jokes, and all I hear now is "pre-4.0 was better." Even in the beta they needed a lot of tweaking and a redesign.
And it's not like Protoss is short on splash. What's wrong with just using Colossi or Templar? Seems like everyone is happier without disruptors in the picture at all. Not every unit in the game has to be built every game. I don't see any problem with restricting disruptors to their own niche.
So exactly what niche do they fill now? Honest question, since I didn't like any iteration of the Disruptor that Blizzard has put out so far. We'll see how the new Disruptor plays out (my guess is that it will go unused on the pro level), but personally I wouldn't mind seeing the duration/range on the Disruptor shot extended so that it can act as a siege unit, i.e. make Lurker or Tank lines unburrow/unsiege and move. I think it would at least create somewhat of an interesting mechanic and would fill a currently unfilled niche in the Protoss army (unless you count Tempests, which I don't, and think is a terribly designed unit).
|
On December 21 2017 11:50 Skyro wrote:
So exactly what niche do they fill now? Honest question, since I didn't like any iteration of the Disruptor that Blizzard has put out so far. We'll see how the new Disruptor plays out (my guess is that it will go unused on the pro level), but personally I wouldn't mind seeing the duration/range on the Disruptor shot extended so that it can act as a siege unit, i.e. make Lurker or Tank lines unburrow/unsiege and move. I think it would at least create somewhat of an interesting mechanic and would fill a currently unfilled niche in the Protoss army (unless you count Tempests, which I don't, and think is a terribly designed unit).
Well i had fun with disruptor even pre-4.0 but i guess it's over. Blowing instantly stuff was reserved to 100 ressources terran unit pre-4.0 too. Double standards are strong here still since everyone want the nerf mine to be reverted but whatever.(and that Drop disru was ready at a timing where it could'nt outright win the game by wiping half of your workers, 4.0 disru was'nt even as strong as a single mine at that job)
I guess upgrading a bit the range so it can outsiege a bit more lurker could be cool, but pro does'nt seems to need it for lurkers and Toss does'nt need other tools against Terran for now so it's seems a lost cause.
But i love how both Tempest & Range-Prism are "bad designed" while Tempest is here only to counter high-range Liberator & Broodlord, and that prism range is here only so protoss can have an acceptable drop tool compared to medivac, and so it can survive vs sniper Queen. Also, Prism Range is'nt what make drop disru strong.
|
On December 21 2017 02:15 LSN wrote:
But lets get back to 3on3. It is completely retarded and in an absolute unbearable state (4v4 the same). You basically play against the carrier timer from the beginning in every single game. Gameplay has never been that narrow before. Is SC2 a worth to play that way? I don't believe so, and I think from the feedback that I got that 90% of people see it the same way.
I concur. As a 4v4 player mainly because I got bored of losing in 1v1 (heck, I did pay for the whole SC2 set, how dare I request some care in that regard!) I can only say that every game vs any toss player gets on a timer. Don't let them reach Golden Armada! It's silly, really.
|
thank you for the center formatting. i think it actually looks good
|
I don't know where to post, so I do here...
The notifications like "An ally units are under attack", "Addon complete", "Upgrade complete" etc are very loud. I have disabled voices but the voice of the notifications are still there.
Especially "An ally units are under attack" has a very annoying voice.
edit: i tested today again. 1v1 is ok but I prefer to reduce that a bit. Coop is actually unplayable, its far too loud.
|
On December 20 2017 23:04 MockHamill wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2017 22:01 LoneYoShi wrote:On December 20 2017 17:30 LSN wrote:
Seriously, does Blizzard even know about their game's state?
It is not far away from command & conquer full retard level anymore.
I don't know many guys, who do not wish to just delete and forget about SC2 altogether, which are no full noobs or total white knights.
As an older guy that plays since WC2 I was recently trying to have some fun with SC2 after a longer period of inactivity (~18 months?). Hence I logged myself into several RT 3on3 games. Halleluja.
I could not manage to play myself out of diamond 3 level for quite some time first. Meanwhiles I reached Diamond 2 level (3on3 RT, solo), which to a large degree is result from lucky random distributions and nothing else, that means I just got more lucky with team mates while my opponent's teams did not.
Ok lets end the funny stories and come to actual issues, to save my and your time:
1. Protoss air is too strong and dominates the whole meta in teamgames.
2. MM in SC2 (such as in HOTS) can not detect player strengths. Players are somewhat randomly distributed over the ranks. It means almost nothing, mostly it is an indicator of activity and the ability to abuse MM mechanics - not an indicator of skill.
3. Even if you are on a certain rank it means few for your matchmaking, hence ranks becomes completely meaningless. Playing 3on3 RT on master 1 gives you the same selection of players as playing on diamond 3 - 90% of times.
(note: all that is related to 3on3 and 4on4 RT with full random team only, not with max fixed mates + 1 random player).
1. Protoss air is too strong.
Carrier's interceptors follow units in range that move out of range way too long. Basically nothing can escape. Even hit and run units like mutas can't escape after hitting carriers, interceptors just a move behind them somehow and kill em over half map size or smth.
Emergency Fix:
Reduce interceptor log on by 67%
Step 2:
Play around with interceptor vs. armor interactions. E.g. give interceptors 2x3 dmg instead of 1x6 and add 2x1 so that it becomes 2x4. Add some armor to affected units like corruptors and reduce their health?
2. Random distribution of skill over the ranks.
Steps:
Determine player skill as a new variable, it is not represented by MMR.
1on1 = 50% 1on1 current + 50% 1on1 history
2on2 = 50% 1on1 + 50% 2on2
3on3 = 50% 1on1, 25% 2on2 + 25% 3on3
4on4 = 50% 1on1, 50/3% 2on2, 50/3% 3on3 + 50/3% 4on4
Add history of teammatches in case history of 1on1 has not enough data (not played or barely played):
Get a % relation of 1on1 to 2on2, 1on1 to 3on3 and 1on1 to 4on4 of each player in the brackets a) current season, b) 12 months, c) all-time. Inject into equations.
3. Random matchmaking:
Create matches amongst players who are similar through a system described before. Stop the matchmaking to believe a better player (lets say master 1) can or even wants to make up for a worse player (lets say gold) while playing against 2 mediocre opponents (lets say diamond). It is a reason for
the randomness as well.
Lets continue with few more funny stories:
I tried playing some protoss and was more successful than playing with my mainrace with only a-moving units around. You go instant air behind cannons + teammates every game. Basically it is enough to do one move with your either rays or fenixes (depending what you opted for) before carriers hit. That means you either a-move out with like 6-8 rays and kill one expansion of the opponent or important tech or units, or you bring down energy of like 10-12 fenixes to zero once while lifting random units. Your carriers arrive meanwhiles and you done mostly.
The randomness of games result from the randomness of team assembly (a system that does not work like the one I described above) combined with the randomness of distribution of skill. It is basically full random, nothing else. Hence I am on diamond 3 (3on3 in that case) just like the guy who got SC2 since free2play patch and system puts us on same skill level. Results are hyper frustrating for everyone I know.
Abuse: You can of course abuse the system with maxed fixed mates + one random mate. It is not my matter, I wanna see SC2 improve, what you deliver in MM is close to trash level.
Even if you manage to get a higher rank you get the same selection of players in your game. It is impossible to feel any fun with the game that way. My 4on4 RT rank is still on master 1 just like 18 months ago when I was #1 EU (I know, big gosu that I am) for several weeks. No matter 18 months ago or now, it does not make any difference in player selection if I play on my 3on3 RT diamond3 or my 4on4 RT master 1, it is the same random selection of players (master + gold = 2x diamond) with random distribution of skill (full noobs in diamond and masters, inactive or non abusers on lower ranks).
SC2 ist what you could call a failed state. Backing off, nuff said. HF flamers.
Edit: Forgot one thing.
I think protoss can get upgrades way too fast with chrono. Curren't patch wont help much I believe. 3 air dmg is there way too fast. Just to make sure I get it right, you're actually proposing changes to the game based on a bunch on random team 3v3 games at diamond level ? Well to be fair Carriers are too strong in 1v1 too. But they are completly OP in team games and basically wreck team game experiences. Since Carriers are too strong in TvP, ZvP and even PvP plus completly broken in team games I think this should be the next thing Blizzard looks at.
I think carriers shouldn't be able to attack air, only ground units.
Protoss have already a lot of air units : voids vs armored, phoenix vs light, tempest vs massive.
They can protect their carriers with voids for example and it will stop them to just make only carriers.
|
Carriers ruin team games completely. I know the game is balanced for 1v1, but they're too strong in 1v1 too if you're allowed to get there. PLEASE nerf!
|
I wouldn't go as far as LSN recommends (interceptor dmg 1x6 -> 2x3),
I previously was thinking decreasing damage 1x6 -> 1x5, but increasing attack speed by 20%, so the dps against zero base armor would be the same, but the carrier would be heavily nerfed against armored units (corruptor, thor, bc)
|
On December 22 2017 06:35 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2017 23:04 MockHamill wrote:On December 20 2017 22:01 LoneYoShi wrote:On December 20 2017 17:30 LSN wrote:
Seriously, does Blizzard even know about their game's state?
It is not far away from command & conquer full retard level anymore.
I don't know many guys, who do not wish to just delete and forget about SC2 altogether, which are no full noobs or total white knights.
As an older guy that plays since WC2 I was recently trying to have some fun with SC2 after a longer period of inactivity (~18 months?). Hence I logged myself into several RT 3on3 games. Halleluja.
I could not manage to play myself out of diamond 3 level for quite some time first. Meanwhiles I reached Diamond 2 level (3on3 RT, solo), which to a large degree is result from lucky random distributions and nothing else, that means I just got more lucky with team mates while my opponent's teams did not.
Ok lets end the funny stories and come to actual issues, to save my and your time:
1. Protoss air is too strong and dominates the whole meta in teamgames.
2. MM in SC2 (such as in HOTS) can not detect player strengths. Players are somewhat randomly distributed over the ranks. It means almost nothing, mostly it is an indicator of activity and the ability to abuse MM mechanics - not an indicator of skill.
3. Even if you are on a certain rank it means few for your matchmaking, hence ranks becomes completely meaningless. Playing 3on3 RT on master 1 gives you the same selection of players as playing on diamond 3 - 90% of times.
(note: all that is related to 3on3 and 4on4 RT with full random team only, not with max fixed mates + 1 random player).
1. Protoss air is too strong.
Carrier's interceptors follow units in range that move out of range way too long. Basically nothing can escape. Even hit and run units like mutas can't escape after hitting carriers, interceptors just a move behind them somehow and kill em over half map size or smth.
Emergency Fix:
Reduce interceptor log on by 67%
Step 2:
Play around with interceptor vs. armor interactions. E.g. give interceptors 2x3 dmg instead of 1x6 and add 2x1 so that it becomes 2x4. Add some armor to affected units like corruptors and reduce their health?
2. Random distribution of skill over the ranks.
Steps:
Determine player skill as a new variable, it is not represented by MMR.
1on1 = 50% 1on1 current + 50% 1on1 history
2on2 = 50% 1on1 + 50% 2on2
3on3 = 50% 1on1, 25% 2on2 + 25% 3on3
4on4 = 50% 1on1, 50/3% 2on2, 50/3% 3on3 + 50/3% 4on4
Add history of teammatches in case history of 1on1 has not enough data (not played or barely played):
Get a % relation of 1on1 to 2on2, 1on1 to 3on3 and 1on1 to 4on4 of each player in the brackets a) current season, b) 12 months, c) all-time. Inject into equations.
3. Random matchmaking:
Create matches amongst players who are similar through a system described before. Stop the matchmaking to believe a better player (lets say master 1) can or even wants to make up for a worse player (lets say gold) while playing against 2 mediocre opponents (lets say diamond). It is a reason for
the randomness as well.
Lets continue with few more funny stories:
I tried playing some protoss and was more successful than playing with my mainrace with only a-moving units around. You go instant air behind cannons + teammates every game. Basically it is enough to do one move with your either rays or fenixes (depending what you opted for) before carriers hit. That means you either a-move out with like 6-8 rays and kill one expansion of the opponent or important tech or units, or you bring down energy of like 10-12 fenixes to zero once while lifting random units. Your carriers arrive meanwhiles and you done mostly.
The randomness of games result from the randomness of team assembly (a system that does not work like the one I described above) combined with the randomness of distribution of skill. It is basically full random, nothing else. Hence I am on diamond 3 (3on3 in that case) just like the guy who got SC2 since free2play patch and system puts us on same skill level. Results are hyper frustrating for everyone I know.
Abuse: You can of course abuse the system with maxed fixed mates + one random mate. It is not my matter, I wanna see SC2 improve, what you deliver in MM is close to trash level.
Even if you manage to get a higher rank you get the same selection of players in your game. It is impossible to feel any fun with the game that way. My 4on4 RT rank is still on master 1 just like 18 months ago when I was #1 EU (I know, big gosu that I am) for several weeks. No matter 18 months ago or now, it does not make any difference in player selection if I play on my 3on3 RT diamond3 or my 4on4 RT master 1, it is the same random selection of players (master + gold = 2x diamond) with random distribution of skill (full noobs in diamond and masters, inactive or non abusers on lower ranks).
SC2 ist what you could call a failed state. Backing off, nuff said. HF flamers.
Edit: Forgot one thing.
I think protoss can get upgrades way too fast with chrono. Curren't patch wont help much I believe. 3 air dmg is there way too fast. Just to make sure I get it right, you're actually proposing changes to the game based on a bunch on random team 3v3 games at diamond level ? Well to be fair Carriers are too strong in 1v1 too. But they are completly OP in team games and basically wreck team game experiences. Since Carriers are too strong in TvP, ZvP and even PvP plus completly broken in team games I think this should be the next thing Blizzard looks at. I think carriers shouldn't be able to attack air, only ground units. Protoss have already a lot of air units : voids vs armored, phoenix vs light, tempest vs massive. They can protect their carriers with voids for example and it will stop them to just make only carriers.
You could just suggest to remove the carrier from the game you know.
|
On December 22 2017 10:43 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2017 06:35 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 20 2017 23:04 MockHamill wrote:On December 20 2017 22:01 LoneYoShi wrote:On December 20 2017 17:30 LSN wrote:
Seriously, does Blizzard even know about their game's state?
It is not far away from command & conquer full retard level anymore.
I don't know many guys, who do not wish to just delete and forget about SC2 altogether, which are no full noobs or total white knights.
As an older guy that plays since WC2 I was recently trying to have some fun with SC2 after a longer period of inactivity (~18 months?). Hence I logged myself into several RT 3on3 games. Halleluja.
I could not manage to play myself out of diamond 3 level for quite some time first. Meanwhiles I reached Diamond 2 level (3on3 RT, solo), which to a large degree is result from lucky random distributions and nothing else, that means I just got more lucky with team mates while my opponent's teams did not.
Ok lets end the funny stories and come to actual issues, to save my and your time:
1. Protoss air is too strong and dominates the whole meta in teamgames.
2. MM in SC2 (such as in HOTS) can not detect player strengths. Players are somewhat randomly distributed over the ranks. It means almost nothing, mostly it is an indicator of activity and the ability to abuse MM mechanics - not an indicator of skill.
3. Even if you are on a certain rank it means few for your matchmaking, hence ranks becomes completely meaningless. Playing 3on3 RT on master 1 gives you the same selection of players as playing on diamond 3 - 90% of times.
(note: all that is related to 3on3 and 4on4 RT with full random team only, not with max fixed mates + 1 random player).
1. Protoss air is too strong.
Carrier's interceptors follow units in range that move out of range way too long. Basically nothing can escape. Even hit and run units like mutas can't escape after hitting carriers, interceptors just a move behind them somehow and kill em over half map size or smth.
Emergency Fix:
Reduce interceptor log on by 67%
Step 2:
Play around with interceptor vs. armor interactions. E.g. give interceptors 2x3 dmg instead of 1x6 and add 2x1 so that it becomes 2x4. Add some armor to affected units like corruptors and reduce their health?
2. Random distribution of skill over the ranks.
Steps:
Determine player skill as a new variable, it is not represented by MMR.
1on1 = 50% 1on1 current + 50% 1on1 history
2on2 = 50% 1on1 + 50% 2on2
3on3 = 50% 1on1, 25% 2on2 + 25% 3on3
4on4 = 50% 1on1, 50/3% 2on2, 50/3% 3on3 + 50/3% 4on4
Add history of teammatches in case history of 1on1 has not enough data (not played or barely played):
Get a % relation of 1on1 to 2on2, 1on1 to 3on3 and 1on1 to 4on4 of each player in the brackets a) current season, b) 12 months, c) all-time. Inject into equations.
3. Random matchmaking:
Create matches amongst players who are similar through a system described before. Stop the matchmaking to believe a better player (lets say master 1) can or even wants to make up for a worse player (lets say gold) while playing against 2 mediocre opponents (lets say diamond). It is a reason for
the randomness as well.
Lets continue with few more funny stories:
I tried playing some protoss and was more successful than playing with my mainrace with only a-moving units around. You go instant air behind cannons + teammates every game. Basically it is enough to do one move with your either rays or fenixes (depending what you opted for) before carriers hit. That means you either a-move out with like 6-8 rays and kill one expansion of the opponent or important tech or units, or you bring down energy of like 10-12 fenixes to zero once while lifting random units. Your carriers arrive meanwhiles and you done mostly.
The randomness of games result from the randomness of team assembly (a system that does not work like the one I described above) combined with the randomness of distribution of skill. It is basically full random, nothing else. Hence I am on diamond 3 (3on3 in that case) just like the guy who got SC2 since free2play patch and system puts us on same skill level. Results are hyper frustrating for everyone I know.
Abuse: You can of course abuse the system with maxed fixed mates + one random mate. It is not my matter, I wanna see SC2 improve, what you deliver in MM is close to trash level.
Even if you manage to get a higher rank you get the same selection of players in your game. It is impossible to feel any fun with the game that way. My 4on4 RT rank is still on master 1 just like 18 months ago when I was #1 EU (I know, big gosu that I am) for several weeks. No matter 18 months ago or now, it does not make any difference in player selection if I play on my 3on3 RT diamond3 or my 4on4 RT master 1, it is the same random selection of players (master + gold = 2x diamond) with random distribution of skill (full noobs in diamond and masters, inactive or non abusers on lower ranks).
SC2 ist what you could call a failed state. Backing off, nuff said. HF flamers.
Edit: Forgot one thing.
I think protoss can get upgrades way too fast with chrono. Curren't patch wont help much I believe. 3 air dmg is there way too fast. Just to make sure I get it right, you're actually proposing changes to the game based on a bunch on random team 3v3 games at diamond level ? Well to be fair Carriers are too strong in 1v1 too. But they are completly OP in team games and basically wreck team game experiences. Since Carriers are too strong in TvP, ZvP and even PvP plus completly broken in team games I think this should be the next thing Blizzard looks at. I think carriers shouldn't be able to attack air, only ground units. Protoss have already a lot of air units : voids vs armored, phoenix vs light, tempest vs massive. They can protect their carriers with voids for example and it will stop them to just make only carriers. You could just suggest to remove the carrier from the game.you know.
That would make him look less reasonable, even though it is effectively the same suggestion.
I hate skytoss as much as the next guy, but there are subtler ways to resolve the issue than deleting carriers outright. And right now PvZ is very much Zerg favored, so while it is true that carriers are a problem, they're a minor problem in the scale of the overall matchup.
|
Remove Mothership.
Please.
|
On December 22 2017 10:40 bela.mervado wrote:
I wouldn't go as far as LSN recommends (interceptor dmg 1x6 -> 2x3),
I previously was thinking decreasing damage 1x6 -> 1x5, but increasing attack speed by 20%, so the dps against zero base armor would be the same, but the carrier would be heavily nerfed against armored units (corruptor, thor, bc)
Actually, each intercepter does 2x5 anyways, so armor already heavily affects carriers. It's why they're so bad against upgraded corruptors, because corruptors have 2 natural armor.
|
Most people don't get that the problem with the carrier is the same problem than with the tempest back in the days : the range.
Carriers may have a 8 "engage" range, but interceptors have a 14 max leash range, meaning that the carrier can virtually kite any unit in the game. Add storms to that, and skytoss will always be problematic.
I actually have no problem with the carrier being strong in frontal fights, and winning against most compositions en masse. If you manage to mass a 350/250 capital ship, you should be rewarded with a powerful firepower. But coupling strong "frontal" fighting power with huge range/kiting is the reason why tempest+HT was the best comp in the game late at the end of HOTS.
Now add the fact that interceptors heavily mess with the opponent's units AI, and you'll get why the carrier is problematic.
From there, there's three ways to look at this :
- the problem is that the carrier is too strong in frontal fights
- the problem is that the carrier can kite pretty much anything
- the interceptors mess with the units AI
To each one, we could come up with structural nerfs :
- make the interceptors weaker, or tighten their flight pattern so that AoE anti air is more effective against carriers, or lessen the carrier's HP pool
- limit the interceptor leash range to 10, which would allow the carrier to retreat from corruptors, hydras, marines, but still be suceptible to thors/abducts and vikings
- make the carriers have a higher priority than their interceptors
Since the last option could actually be wacky ingame or an unwanted buff, i think that tightening the interceptor's flight patterns and limiting their leash range to 12 or 11 would be a good start.
|
On December 22 2017 12:31 FrkFrJss wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2017 10:40 bela.mervado wrote:
I wouldn't go as far as LSN recommends (interceptor dmg 1x6 -> 2x3),
I previously was thinking decreasing damage 1x6 -> 1x5, but increasing attack speed by 20%, so the dps against zero base armor would be the same, but the carrier would be heavily nerfed against armored units (corruptor, thor, bc) Actually, each intercepter does 2x5 anyways, so armor already heavily affects carriers. It's why they're so bad against upgraded corruptors, because corruptors have 2 natural armor.
wow you are right, i feel stupid to not to have double checked the actual damage T_T shame on me -.-
still, i dont feel that corruptors are actually actually a good counter for a nice carrier heavy endgame toss army (some templars/archons below carriers, or voids+mothership support).
i had mixed success with neural parasite, and the new infested terran seems to be quite strong, but it's not that hard to make a game ending mistake with these fragile caster guys (good opponents can feedback, and in team games there will be an other team member with the carriers so the infestors can melt in a blink of an eye).
i know it can be hard even for pros (thinking about Rogue vs Neeb), but honestly i don't care much about pros. i'd like my experience be a nice one. i often work my ass to have creep everywhere, have good vision, know where the opponent teams are, fight against very nice blink stalkers, deflect mmm drops, and finally i see my 29 apm 2 base teammate turtle up to 8+ carriers and a-move to win the game for us.
|
On December 22 2017 10:43 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2017 06:35 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 20 2017 23:04 MockHamill wrote:On December 20 2017 22:01 LoneYoShi wrote:On December 20 2017 17:30 LSN wrote:
Seriously, does Blizzard even know about their game's state?
It is not far away from command & conquer full retard level anymore.
I don't know many guys, who do not wish to just delete and forget about SC2 altogether, which are no full noobs or total white knights.
As an older guy that plays since WC2 I was recently trying to have some fun with SC2 after a longer period of inactivity (~18 months?). Hence I logged myself into several RT 3on3 games. Halleluja.
I could not manage to play myself out of diamond 3 level for quite some time first. Meanwhiles I reached Diamond 2 level (3on3 RT, solo), which to a large degree is result from lucky random distributions and nothing else, that means I just got more lucky with team mates while my opponent's teams did not.
Ok lets end the funny stories and come to actual issues, to save my and your time:
1. Protoss air is too strong and dominates the whole meta in teamgames.
2. MM in SC2 (such as in HOTS) can not detect player strengths. Players are somewhat randomly distributed over the ranks. It means almost nothing, mostly it is an indicator of activity and the ability to abuse MM mechanics - not an indicator of skill.
3. Even if you are on a certain rank it means few for your matchmaking, hence ranks becomes completely meaningless. Playing 3on3 RT on master 1 gives you the same selection of players as playing on diamond 3 - 90% of times.
(note: all that is related to 3on3 and 4on4 RT with full random team only, not with max fixed mates + 1 random player).
1. Protoss air is too strong.
Carrier's interceptors follow units in range that move out of range way too long. Basically nothing can escape. Even hit and run units like mutas can't escape after hitting carriers, interceptors just a move behind them somehow and kill em over half map size or smth.
Emergency Fix:
Reduce interceptor log on by 67%
Step 2:
Play around with interceptor vs. armor interactions. E.g. give interceptors 2x3 dmg instead of 1x6 and add 2x1 so that it becomes 2x4. Add some armor to affected units like corruptors and reduce their health?
2. Random distribution of skill over the ranks.
Steps:
Determine player skill as a new variable, it is not represented by MMR.
1on1 = 50% 1on1 current + 50% 1on1 history
2on2 = 50% 1on1 + 50% 2on2
3on3 = 50% 1on1, 25% 2on2 + 25% 3on3
4on4 = 50% 1on1, 50/3% 2on2, 50/3% 3on3 + 50/3% 4on4
Add history of teammatches in case history of 1on1 has not enough data (not played or barely played):
Get a % relation of 1on1 to 2on2, 1on1 to 3on3 and 1on1 to 4on4 of each player in the brackets a) current season, b) 12 months, c) all-time. Inject into equations.
3. Random matchmaking:
Create matches amongst players who are similar through a system described before. Stop the matchmaking to believe a better player (lets say master 1) can or even wants to make up for a worse player (lets say gold) while playing against 2 mediocre opponents (lets say diamond). It is a reason for
the randomness as well.
Lets continue with few more funny stories:
I tried playing some protoss and was more successful than playing with my mainrace with only a-moving units around. You go instant air behind cannons + teammates every game. Basically it is enough to do one move with your either rays or fenixes (depending what you opted for) before carriers hit. That means you either a-move out with like 6-8 rays and kill one expansion of the opponent or important tech or units, or you bring down energy of like 10-12 fenixes to zero once while lifting random units. Your carriers arrive meanwhiles and you done mostly.
The randomness of games result from the randomness of team assembly (a system that does not work like the one I described above) combined with the randomness of distribution of skill. It is basically full random, nothing else. Hence I am on diamond 3 (3on3 in that case) just like the guy who got SC2 since free2play patch and system puts us on same skill level. Results are hyper frustrating for everyone I know.
Abuse: You can of course abuse the system with maxed fixed mates + one random mate. It is not my matter, I wanna see SC2 improve, what you deliver in MM is close to trash level.
Even if you manage to get a higher rank you get the same selection of players in your game. It is impossible to feel any fun with the game that way. My 4on4 RT rank is still on master 1 just like 18 months ago when I was #1 EU (I know, big gosu that I am) for several weeks. No matter 18 months ago or now, it does not make any difference in player selection if I play on my 3on3 RT diamond3 or my 4on4 RT master 1, it is the same random selection of players (master + gold = 2x diamond) with random distribution of skill (full noobs in diamond and masters, inactive or non abusers on lower ranks).
SC2 ist what you could call a failed state. Backing off, nuff said. HF flamers.
Edit: Forgot one thing.
I think protoss can get upgrades way too fast with chrono. Curren't patch wont help much I believe. 3 air dmg is there way too fast. Just to make sure I get it right, you're actually proposing changes to the game based on a bunch on random team 3v3 games at diamond level ? Well to be fair Carriers are too strong in 1v1 too. But they are completly OP in team games and basically wreck team game experiences. Since Carriers are too strong in TvP, ZvP and even PvP plus completly broken in team games I think this should be the next thing Blizzard looks at. I think carriers shouldn't be able to attack air, only ground units. Protoss have already a lot of air units : voids vs armored, phoenix vs light, tempest vs massive. They can protect their carriers with voids for example and it will stop them to just make only carriers. You could just suggest to remove the carrier from the game you know.
I guess broodlords which don't hit air units are useless right ?
You can adjust the cost or the dmg or the building time, or buff the voids/tempest phoenix if they're too weak, but as shown from all this years, you can't balance a unit that is sufficient from itself and good vs everything like carriers.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On December 22 2017 16:30 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2017 10:43 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On December 22 2017 06:35 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 20 2017 23:04 MockHamill wrote:On December 20 2017 22:01 LoneYoShi wrote:On December 20 2017 17:30 LSN wrote:
Seriously, does Blizzard even know about their game's state?
It is not far away from command & conquer full retard level anymore.
I don't know many guys, who do not wish to just delete and forget about SC2 altogether, which are no full noobs or total white knights.
As an older guy that plays since WC2 I was recently trying to have some fun with SC2 after a longer period of inactivity (~18 months?). Hence I logged myself into several RT 3on3 games. Halleluja.
I could not manage to play myself out of diamond 3 level for quite some time first. Meanwhiles I reached Diamond 2 level (3on3 RT, solo), which to a large degree is result from lucky random distributions and nothing else, that means I just got more lucky with team mates while my opponent's teams did not.
Ok lets end the funny stories and come to actual issues, to save my and your time:
1. Protoss air is too strong and dominates the whole meta in teamgames.
2. MM in SC2 (such as in HOTS) can not detect player strengths. Players are somewhat randomly distributed over the ranks. It means almost nothing, mostly it is an indicator of activity and the ability to abuse MM mechanics - not an indicator of skill.
3. Even if you are on a certain rank it means few for your matchmaking, hence ranks becomes completely meaningless. Playing 3on3 RT on master 1 gives you the same selection of players as playing on diamond 3 - 90% of times.
(note: all that is related to 3on3 and 4on4 RT with full random team only, not with max fixed mates + 1 random player).
1. Protoss air is too strong.
Carrier's interceptors follow units in range that move out of range way too long. Basically nothing can escape. Even hit and run units like mutas can't escape after hitting carriers, interceptors just a move behind them somehow and kill em over half map size or smth.
Emergency Fix:
Reduce interceptor log on by 67%
Step 2:
Play around with interceptor vs. armor interactions. E.g. give interceptors 2x3 dmg instead of 1x6 and add 2x1 so that it becomes 2x4. Add some armor to affected units like corruptors and reduce their health?
2. Random distribution of skill over the ranks.
Steps:
Determine player skill as a new variable, it is not represented by MMR.
1on1 = 50% 1on1 current + 50% 1on1 history
2on2 = 50% 1on1 + 50% 2on2
3on3 = 50% 1on1, 25% 2on2 + 25% 3on3
4on4 = 50% 1on1, 50/3% 2on2, 50/3% 3on3 + 50/3% 4on4
Add history of teammatches in case history of 1on1 has not enough data (not played or barely played):
Get a % relation of 1on1 to 2on2, 1on1 to 3on3 and 1on1 to 4on4 of each player in the brackets a) current season, b) 12 months, c) all-time. Inject into equations.
3. Random matchmaking:
Create matches amongst players who are similar through a system described before. Stop the matchmaking to believe a better player (lets say master 1) can or even wants to make up for a worse player (lets say gold) while playing against 2 mediocre opponents (lets say diamond). It is a reason for
the randomness as well.
Lets continue with few more funny stories:
I tried playing some protoss and was more successful than playing with my mainrace with only a-moving units around. You go instant air behind cannons + teammates every game. Basically it is enough to do one move with your either rays or fenixes (depending what you opted for) before carriers hit. That means you either a-move out with like 6-8 rays and kill one expansion of the opponent or important tech or units, or you bring down energy of like 10-12 fenixes to zero once while lifting random units. Your carriers arrive meanwhiles and you done mostly.
The randomness of games result from the randomness of team assembly (a system that does not work like the one I described above) combined with the randomness of distribution of skill. It is basically full random, nothing else. Hence I am on diamond 3 (3on3 in that case) just like the guy who got SC2 since free2play patch and system puts us on same skill level. Results are hyper frustrating for everyone I know.
Abuse: You can of course abuse the system with maxed fixed mates + one random mate. It is not my matter, I wanna see SC2 improve, what you deliver in MM is close to trash level.
Even if you manage to get a higher rank you get the same selection of players in your game. It is impossible to feel any fun with the game that way. My 4on4 RT rank is still on master 1 just like 18 months ago when I was #1 EU (I know, big gosu that I am) for several weeks. No matter 18 months ago or now, it does not make any difference in player selection if I play on my 3on3 RT diamond3 or my 4on4 RT master 1, it is the same random selection of players (master + gold = 2x diamond) with random distribution of skill (full noobs in diamond and masters, inactive or non abusers on lower ranks).
SC2 ist what you could call a failed state. Backing off, nuff said. HF flamers.
Edit: Forgot one thing.
I think protoss can get upgrades way too fast with chrono. Curren't patch wont help much I believe. 3 air dmg is there way too fast. Just to make sure I get it right, you're actually proposing changes to the game based on a bunch on random team 3v3 games at diamond level ? Well to be fair Carriers are too strong in 1v1 too. But they are completly OP in team games and basically wreck team game experiences. Since Carriers are too strong in TvP, ZvP and even PvP plus completly broken in team games I think this should be the next thing Blizzard looks at. I think carriers shouldn't be able to attack air, only ground units. Protoss have already a lot of air units : voids vs armored, phoenix vs light, tempest vs massive. They can protect their carriers with voids for example and it will stop them to just make only carriers. You could just suggest to remove the carrier from the game you know. I guess broodlords which don't hit air units are useless right ? You can adjust the cost or the dmg or the building time, or buff the voids/tempest phoenix if they're too weak, but as shown from all this years, you can't balance a unit that is sufficient from itself and good vs everything like carriers.
Broodlord is a different type of unit(add to that carrier legacy).
If you want to change the carrier into an AG tempest, feel free to suggest it, but don't look for others to agree with you. Blizzard had to revert one change already because people actually like carriers.
|
On December 22 2017 21:23 deacon.frost wrote:
because people actually like carriers.
People playing with carriers like carriers. Not people playing against them.
|
T plater here - TvP perspective only. I think most of the Protoss arsenal is in a good state (oracles and adepts are in a better spot IMO and shield batteries are effective early game but not large armies) the main exceptions are the strength of the warp-prism and blink stalkers. I think to give the prism a 1-1.5s delay in transitioning in and out of pylon mode would be worth testing (think siege tank/liberator siege time) and possibly looking at either the cost of blink / its cooldown or its travel range would be good ways of avoiding a nerf to stalker damage because it's just too easy to burst things down and get away atm.
I think Carriers + MS when combined are a bit OP but I feel like whatever your race, if you let P get away with massing carriers and don't either overwhelm them, snipe/chip away at them or pull them out of position then it's not surprising when the strongest unit of the most expensive race ends up rolling you.. Definitely can be pretty hard when P already has a strong ground army with splash.
|
On December 22 2017 21:23 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2017 16:30 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 22 2017 10:43 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On December 22 2017 06:35 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 20 2017 23:04 MockHamill wrote:On December 20 2017 22:01 LoneYoShi wrote:On December 20 2017 17:30 LSN wrote:
Seriously, does Blizzard even know about their game's state?
It is not far away from command & conquer full retard level anymore.
I don't know many guys, who do not wish to just delete and forget about SC2 altogether, which are no full noobs or total white knights.
As an older guy that plays since WC2 I was recently trying to have some fun with SC2 after a longer period of inactivity (~18 months?). Hence I logged myself into several RT 3on3 games. Halleluja.
I could not manage to play myself out of diamond 3 level for quite some time first. Meanwhiles I reached Diamond 2 level (3on3 RT, solo), which to a large degree is result from lucky random distributions and nothing else, that means I just got more lucky with team mates while my opponent's teams did not.
Ok lets end the funny stories and come to actual issues, to save my and your time:
1. Protoss air is too strong and dominates the whole meta in teamgames.
2. MM in SC2 (such as in HOTS) can not detect player strengths. Players are somewhat randomly distributed over the ranks. It means almost nothing, mostly it is an indicator of activity and the ability to abuse MM mechanics - not an indicator of skill.
3. Even if you are on a certain rank it means few for your matchmaking, hence ranks becomes completely meaningless. Playing 3on3 RT on master 1 gives you the same selection of players as playing on diamond 3 - 90% of times.
(note: all that is related to 3on3 and 4on4 RT with full random team only, not with max fixed mates + 1 random player).
1. Protoss air is too strong.
Carrier's interceptors follow units in range that move out of range way too long. Basically nothing can escape. Even hit and run units like mutas can't escape after hitting carriers, interceptors just a move behind them somehow and kill em over half map size or smth.
Emergency Fix:
Reduce interceptor log on by 67%
Step 2:
Play around with interceptor vs. armor interactions. E.g. give interceptors 2x3 dmg instead of 1x6 and add 2x1 so that it becomes 2x4. Add some armor to affected units like corruptors and reduce their health?
2. Random distribution of skill over the ranks.
Steps:
Determine player skill as a new variable, it is not represented by MMR.
1on1 = 50% 1on1 current + 50% 1on1 history
2on2 = 50% 1on1 + 50% 2on2
3on3 = 50% 1on1, 25% 2on2 + 25% 3on3
4on4 = 50% 1on1, 50/3% 2on2, 50/3% 3on3 + 50/3% 4on4
Add history of teammatches in case history of 1on1 has not enough data (not played or barely played):
Get a % relation of 1on1 to 2on2, 1on1 to 3on3 and 1on1 to 4on4 of each player in the brackets a) current season, b) 12 months, c) all-time. Inject into equations.
3. Random matchmaking:
Create matches amongst players who are similar through a system described before. Stop the matchmaking to believe a better player (lets say master 1) can or even wants to make up for a worse player (lets say gold) while playing against 2 mediocre opponents (lets say diamond). It is a reason for
the randomness as well.
Lets continue with few more funny stories:
I tried playing some protoss and was more successful than playing with my mainrace with only a-moving units around. You go instant air behind cannons + teammates every game. Basically it is enough to do one move with your either rays or fenixes (depending what you opted for) before carriers hit. That means you either a-move out with like 6-8 rays and kill one expansion of the opponent or important tech or units, or you bring down energy of like 10-12 fenixes to zero once while lifting random units. Your carriers arrive meanwhiles and you done mostly.
The randomness of games result from the randomness of team assembly (a system that does not work like the one I described above) combined with the randomness of distribution of skill. It is basically full random, nothing else. Hence I am on diamond 3 (3on3 in that case) just like the guy who got SC2 since free2play patch and system puts us on same skill level. Results are hyper frustrating for everyone I know.
Abuse: You can of course abuse the system with maxed fixed mates + one random mate. It is not my matter, I wanna see SC2 improve, what you deliver in MM is close to trash level.
Even if you manage to get a higher rank you get the same selection of players in your game. It is impossible to feel any fun with the game that way. My 4on4 RT rank is still on master 1 just like 18 months ago when I was #1 EU (I know, big gosu that I am) for several weeks. No matter 18 months ago or now, it does not make any difference in player selection if I play on my 3on3 RT diamond3 or my 4on4 RT master 1, it is the same random selection of players (master + gold = 2x diamond) with random distribution of skill (full noobs in diamond and masters, inactive or non abusers on lower ranks).
SC2 ist what you could call a failed state. Backing off, nuff said. HF flamers.
Edit: Forgot one thing.
I think protoss can get upgrades way too fast with chrono. Curren't patch wont help much I believe. 3 air dmg is there way too fast. Just to make sure I get it right, you're actually proposing changes to the game based on a bunch on random team 3v3 games at diamond level ? Well to be fair Carriers are too strong in 1v1 too. But they are completly OP in team games and basically wreck team game experiences. Since Carriers are too strong in TvP, ZvP and even PvP plus completly broken in team games I think this should be the next thing Blizzard looks at. I think carriers shouldn't be able to attack air, only ground units. Protoss have already a lot of air units : voids vs armored, phoenix vs light, tempest vs massive. They can protect their carriers with voids for example and it will stop them to just make only carriers. You could just suggest to remove the carrier from the game you know. I guess broodlords which don't hit air units are useless right ? You can adjust the cost or the dmg or the building time, or buff the voids/tempest phoenix if they're too weak, but as shown from all this years, you can't balance a unit that is sufficient from itself and good vs everything like carriers. Broodlord is a different type of unit(add to that carrier legacy). If you want to change the carrier into an AG tempest, feel free to suggest it, but don't look for others to agree with you. Blizzard had to revert one change already because people actually like carriers.
Add "i like this unit" to every imbalance units and we would never have had any patches from now.
|
May I ask what scenario makes disruptors still useful?
does anyone systematically builds colossi and or disruptors?
|
On December 23 2017 07:33 260Vazi wrote:
May I ask what scenario makes disruptors still useful?
does anyone systematically builds colossi and or disruptors?
Lol? I see colossi in almost every TvP.
|
I think carriers + high templars combo is at least the same if not worse than broodlords + infestors. Don't you guys see it??? Both are ridiculous hard to beat and both STAY FOR TOO LONG.I am sure as fuck that blizzard acknowledged this but they refused to fix because the only one different between skytoss and skyzerg is skytoss isn't a common thing in pro scene to the point it could ruin the whole game like how broodlords + infestors era has ruined WOL. But raven got redesigned despite mass raven's a myth in pro scene for a reason right??? Am i right guys???
So i still have hope in this balance team  And i would choose carrier over high templar for getting addressed all day.
Beside that the rest of protoss is fine not sure why people complain about gateway units be able to dumpster bios tho... Blizzard should've done that wayyyy before hots :D
|
mass raven was played in pro games a long time ago (in HoTs, before turrets buff, but seeker missile and PDD was powerfull ), on some TvZ split-maps, after a mech opening.
JackONeill in #68 got it right. The two main issues with carriers are the range and the AI brain-fuck (and then, ofc, templars).
|
On December 24 2017 07:27 xongnox wrote:
mass raven was played in pro games a long time ago (in HoTs, before turrets buff, but seeker missile and PDD was powerfull ), on some TvZ split-maps, after a mech opening.
JackONeill in #68 got it right. The two main issues with carriers are the range and the AI brain-fuck (and then, ofc, templars).
That's not the timeline i've mentioned... I means in this year where zerg has the upper hand in late game despite we already know terran had a tool to completely trash any late game zerg army. They did nerf the raven after hots btw.
|
What's the solution to Lurkers in PvZ without just functionally deleting the unit? Protoss needs to invest in either Storm or Colossus to deal with Hydras, but both are garbage versus Lurkers. Immortals are good versus Lurkers, but getting those along with the aforementioned aoe without dying or letting the Zerg throw down a million bases and transitioning into something like Broodlords is not easy. Undoing the 4.0 Disruptor change would probably just delete Lurkers from the match up.
|
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU.
|
On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU.
Generally speaking, individual sets are fairly poor indicators of balance. What you hope to see is a trend of top players from the skill level of top foreigners to the top of Koreans and seeing generally where the distribution lies. Although foreigners are worse than the top Koreans, you can still see some indication of balance.
Individual sets can always have explanations. For instance, Dark made a lot of silly mistakes versus sOs and should have won 3-0 or 3-1, Impact and Solar are below the skill level of Innovation, Byul is worse than Zest, and the only real surprise is Rogue versus Bunny. Gumiho's style works well against soO, and Classic has always been a top Protoss.
This isn't to say that the game is or isn't relatively balanced just that pulling from a few matches does not indicate balance and that individual sets always have explanations.
I can say that Neeb has lost 1-2, 2-3, and 2-3 against Scarlett in their last three sets, who he 3-1ed quite convincingly only a few months prior. As Neeb is one of the best if not the best foreigner, and Scarlett is not, obviously this means PvZ is imbalanced. Or, perhaps Scarlett's form went up and Neeb's went down. Or, perhaps Scarlett's style just works better against Neeb. Or, perhaps the matchup isn't fully balanced.
|
The thing is that since 4.0 every time i see tournament with korean players, online cups, there is none won by Zerg. Protoss dominates. Korea is the best place to determine balance as we got the best players out there. So sorry dude, but clearly Zerg isn't OP nowadays. I think that all recent nerfs to Zerg and buffs in other races were overkill for Z. As always, when new patch is coming Zerg has his 5 minites, but then the whine from T and P players forces Blizzard to use the nerf hammer. Same story every time.
|
I don't say they're underpowered, i say they're not OP like Terran/Protoss used to spam here.
Results of highest level are the best indicators of balance rather than thousands game of john the Terran vs michZerg where the issue is just the level of the two dude and nothing related to balance.
Bunny beating Rogue with a convincing 3-0 means Terran race have the weapon to beat the best Zerg of the world so every other zergs right now in this patch in this actual meta.
Then a T can lose 1000-0 vs a Zerg, and say " look the winrate, T so weak needs buffs asap" as we see that 3 times a day, he is just a whiner who lost because he is just bad.
Balance shouldn't be changed because of this player, if he wants to win more he just needs to open bunny's stream and learns.
Of course he will keep pretending these games are poor indicators of balance because "not enough games", but the truth he is ignoring facts that don't support his whine and while they are less numerous they are relevant to speak of balance while his thousands games are just "the other is better than him"
|
Z is very OP vs T bio, but most korean terrans nowadays mech their way in ZvT. (wich is a completely different MU)
|
On December 24 2017 18:16 hiroshOne wrote:
The thing is that since 4.0 every time i see tournament with korean players, online cups, there is none won by Zerg. Protoss dominates. Korea is the best place to determine balance as we got the best players out there. So sorry dude, but clearly Zerg isn't OP nowadays. I think that all recent nerfs to Zerg and buffs in other races were overkill for Z. As always, when new patch is coming Zerg has his 5 minites, but then the whine from T and P players forces Blizzard to use the nerf hammer. Same story every time.
Patch 3.14.0
Roach and infestor burrowed undetected movement is much more visible
Patch 3.8.0
Broodlord range decreased from 11 to 10
November 28 balance update
Infestors
Can no longer cast Fungal Growth while burrowed.
Fungal Growth radius reduced from 2.5 to 2.25.
Infested Terran cast range reduced from 9 to 7.
As far as I could tell, these are all the nerfs to Zerg in all of LotV. It's quite the nerf hammer indeed. Actually, what I noticed was that they've been relatively hands off with regards to nerfs/buffs during LotV.
Second, you say
The thing is that since 4.0 every time i see tournament with korean players, online cups, there is none won by Zerg.
The problem with this statement is that while it may be true for you, it may not be true for other people. Other people, watching different tournaments, with different players, may see something different depending on their biases.
I looked at a lot of results with KvK in online tournaments since the update. You are correct that few tournaments are being won by Zergs. However, there have been relatively few online tournaments since the update. With the year winding down, this is the downtime for a lot of people. Second, looking at the players, the top Zerg players play less often than the top Protoss and Terran. For instance, you'll often see Gumiho, Innovation, Zest, and Stats play in these tournaments, whereas Dark, Rogue, and soO play less often. Solar plays a lot as do Impact, Losira, and TRUE, but none of those players are really considered the best zerg players.
Some things that do stand out, however, are the BTSL Special and the ONPOONG ultimate battles. Dark has won bo11 versus many top players (and I believe is currently undefeated), and in the BTSL, there are currently 3 zergs and 1 protoss in semifinals. Again, all this information is not necessarily to say that Zerg is OP (that point is debateable) but that the data points that you use are very critical. Depending on the point of view, you can come to two very different perspectives.
Note: I left out the IEM and WESG qualifiers as the WESG qualifiers were bo1 for way too long and then bo3 at the end, and those aren't the greatest for determining balance, and the Zerg losses in IEM were already covered.
|
Oh they play dude, they play but they are knocked out of those online tournaments quickly enough.
Now. I don't say that T or P are overpowered as fuck in vsZ matchups. I'm just saying that this whole "Zerg OP" shit is ridiculous.
The same goes with- Zerg is OP vs BIO but not OP vs mech and those are two different matchups. It's fucking stupid statement. Both are same matchup- TvZ. So when i play Roach/Ravager or Hydra/Ling/Bane or Broodlord/Infestor vs Terran, those are different matchups? Plz.
|
On December 24 2017 19:31 hiroshOne wrote:
Oh they play dude, they play but they are knocked out of those online tournaments quickly enough.
Now. I don't say that T or P are overpowered as fuck in vsZ matchups. I'm just saying that this whole "Zerg OP" shit is ridiculous.
The same goes with- Zerg is OP vs BIO but not OP vs mech and those are two different matchups. It's fucking stupid statement. Both are same matchup- TvZ. So when i play Roach/Ravager or Hydra/Ling/Bane or Broodlord/Infestor vs Terran, those are different matchups? Plz.
Protoss ended the previous aligulac balance period with a 41.5% win rate against Zerg. That's worse than PvT ever was using the same metrics. So no, Zerg OP is NOT ridiculous.
|
Foreigners Zergs seems OP at foreigner level and win everything except Neeb/Special, but that is not the case at all in Korea. That's way we get theses stats on aligulac but no korean zerg win. Balance is not the same at different level + sometimes Korean meta differ significantly (imo koreans Z should watch mores foreign ones... )
Hirosh > well, from a Terran player perspective, mech/bio really feel like playing two different races. Zerg is OP vs T bio is simply a shortcut to say the actual meta in TvZ bio is Z-favored.
TvZ may be balance when playing mech. I simply don't want to play (or watch that much) mech, that's not the Terran race i enjoy.
If terran was balanced by playing avilo-style, it still would be stupid bullshit design, et nothing to do with the terran race we love.
|
On December 25 2017 00:55 xongnox wrote:
Foreigners Zergs seems OP at foreigner level and win everything except Neeb/Special, but that is not the case at all in Korea. That's way we get theses stats on aligulac but no korean zerg win. Balance is not the same at different level + sometimes Korean meta differ significantly (imo koreans Z should watch mores foreign ones... )
The whole "Zergs never win in Korea" should be a meme at this point with how dumb and inaccurate it is. It wasn't true in 2016 when people were saying it. It wasn't true in 2017 when people were saying it. It almost certainly won't be true when people say it in 2018.
Which tournaments played over the last few weeks featuring the upper echelon of Korean Zergs show the race struggling?
-Dark got out of the WESG SK qualifiers.
-Zergs are doing well in the BaseTrade Star League (3/4 semifinalists are Zerg).
-IEM qualifiers were less impressive, but I don't see any result there that isn't within the realm of normal variance. (That includes Rogue losing to Bunny. It is hard to stay motivated after winning $300,000 and Bunny is probably the most underrated player in Korea at the moment)
-I don't see any recent Olimoleagues (which often only has a smattering of the best players) and I'm not familiar with any other minor tournaments that has a decent representation of top Koreans.
|
France12771 Posts
On December 24 2017 18:30 Tyrhanius wrote:
I don't say they're underpowered, i say they're not OP like Terran/Protoss used to spam here.
Results of highest level are the best indicators of balance rather than thousands game of john the Terran vs michZerg where the issue is just the level of the two dude and nothing related to balance.
Bunny beating Rogue with a convincing 3-0 means Terran race have the weapon to beat the best Zerg of the world so every other zergs right now in this patch in this actual meta.
Then a T can lose 1000-0 vs a Zerg, and say " look the winrate, T so weak needs buffs asap" as we see that 3 times a day, he is just a whiner who lost because he is just bad.
Balance shouldn't be changed because of this player, if he wants to win more he just needs to open bunny's stream and learns.
Of course he will keep pretending these games are poor indicators of balance because "not enough games", but the truth he is ignoring facts that don't support his whine and while they are less numerous they are relevant to speak of balance while his thousands games are just "the other is better than him"
I didn't see Bunny vs Rogue but it's a single match so not enough to conclude much.
Especially since Rogue just won Blizzcon, hard to know if he still practices seriously or not.
From the recent tournaments I watched and a bit of ladder, zerg doesn't seem especially OP, but protoss feels strong atm.
|
On December 24 2017 19:31 hiroshOne wrote:
Oh they play dude, they play but they are knocked out of those online tournaments quickly enough.
Now. I don't say that T or P are overpowered as fuck in vsZ matchups. I'm just saying that this whole "Zerg OP" shit is ridiculous.
The same goes with- Zerg is OP vs BIO but not OP vs mech and those are two different matchups. It's fucking stupid statement. Both are same matchup- TvZ. So when i play Roach/Ravager or Hydra/Ling/Bane or Broodlord/Infestor vs Terran, those are different matchups? Plz.
It's not that Zerg is OP vs. bio, it's that bio is just weak. On top of being weak, bio has been the standard style for so long that I think pro level Zerg's are just flat out good at fighting it, years and years of practice and such. While I do agree with, "So when i play Roach/Ravager or Hydra/Ling/Bane or Broodlord/Infestor vs Terran, those are different matchups?" to a degree Terran is alot more binary. Expansion timings, move outs, compositions, everything is way different for mass factory vs. mass barracks.
Still, Zerg isn't OP, there has been major changes that would undoubtedly affect win rates and those things take time to iron out. Protoss seems strong as hell though with the buffed stalker, Gateway armies are pretty fearsome at the moment.
|
On December 25 2017 03:20 Beelzebub1 wrote:
Still, Zerg isn't OP, there has been major changes that would undoubtedly affect win rates and those things take time to iron out. Protoss seems strong as hell though with the buffed stalker, Gateway armies are pretty fearsome at the moment.
Let the meta settle when it is Zerg OP, but nerf Protoss immediately to the ground. Sounds about right.
|
On December 24 2017 19:23 FrkFrJss wrote:
Patch 3.14.0
Roach and infestor burrowed undetected movement is much more visible
Patch 3.8.0
Broodlord range decreased from 11 to 10
November 28 balance update
Infestors
Can no longer cast Fungal Growth while burrowed.
Fungal Growth radius reduced from 2.5 to 2.25.
Infested Terran cast range reduced from 9 to 7.
As far as I could tell, these are all the nerfs to Zerg in all of LotV. It's quite the nerf hammer indeed. Actually, what I noticed was that they've been relatively hands off with regards to nerfs/buffs during LotV.
I like that you are collecting nerfs like this, but there is one thing there that shouldn't be. The fungal nerf from 2.5 to 2.25 was made directly after a buff from 2.0 to 2.5 that got partly reverted. It is actually a buff from 2.0 to 2.25.
|
^^ but still deleting burrowed funghal, removing root effect and changing it into slow is a huge berf compare to previous iteration. Wouldn't u agree?
|
90% slow = root to me and bigger radius = buff
Burrowed fungal was a big mistake from the balance team, and it was really cheesy sometimes.
I can't believe that they are trying to say that zerg is weak.
|
On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU.
Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss).
Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there.
Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season.
|
On December 25 2017 03:44 Boggyb wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2017 03:20 Beelzebub1 wrote:
Still, Zerg isn't OP, there has been major changes that would undoubtedly affect win rates and those things take time to iron out. Protoss seems strong as hell though with the buffed stalker, Gateway armies are pretty fearsome at the moment. Let the meta settle when it is Zerg OP, but nerf Protoss immediately to the ground. Sounds about right.
I don't think ZvP is perfect, but that is a match up that has always hinged on a razor edge with one race generally getting a meta that favors them for awhile and then a new style of play shifts it back into their favor.
If the trend continues I'd change my tune though, anything below 45% is clearly underpowered, it's not like Protoss isn't doing fine and dandy vs. Terran at the moment or anything. I'm sure something like making Overlord drops come a bit later/be more expensive would be appropriate, maybe a slight Hydra nerf.
|
I'm a random player. Can anybody still play bio versus Zerg? With these "visible" mines?
|
On December 25 2017 11:47 StarscreamG1 wrote:
I'm a random player. Can anybody still play bio versus Zerg? With these "visible" mines?
bio is not great vs zerg but honestly the problem is not the mine nerf the main impact of that nerf was on tvp. In tvz the meta for zerg is lingbane hydra, mines were terrible vs lbh before the nerf so nerfing them changed nothing you have to go tanks vs lbh. the problem for bio in tvz is that its not good enough at fighting lbh to stop zerg from reaching ultras. Bio is realy bad once zerg gets ultras so if you cant stop them from reaching ultras why bother gong it. TvZ mech is alright though so its not like terran cant win games, ocasionaly you can win games wtih bio to buts its very map deppendent. But bottom line is that the mine nerf is not all that important when it comes to bio viability in tvz what is important is the incredible strength of lbh in the mid game and also the raven nerf and the strength of queens at shutting down any kind of air based harass.
|
On December 25 2017 11:47 StarscreamG1 wrote:
I'm a random player. Can anybody still play bio versus Zerg? With these "visible" mines?
Below the pro level you can do whatever you want, including bio vs Zerg. At the pro level, bio is not really viable and mech is standard.
Though the mine nerf had little impact on TvZ. The big change that killed bio in TvZ was the hydra buff. which caused Hydra/Ling/Bane to become the dominant Zerg build against Terran as well as Protoss.
|
Sure you can do whatever you want below pro lvl, but now you lose against weaker players than before.
So it means nothing, you can also play whatever you want at pro lvl and lose anyway.
I don't understand your reasoning.
Even TY said that below 6k mmr terrans should play mech double upgrades and gg.
|
Well they needed to buff hydras, especially as through whole pack of changes in Terran arsenal they threw mutas into oblivion in this matchup. I wonder how Z could ever win vs Terran concidering that Mutas are non existing strategy and if they nerfed hydras. Yeah. I bet it would be fine to wreck all Zergs on ladder with few drops...PvZ would be fine as well right? My god you are all so biased. Every time Zerg gets viable shit, I hear T and P whine. You got bunch of things that irritates Zergs as well, be aware of that.
|
On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season.
Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ?
Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo.
We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do.
|
exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss).
Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo.
We have to stop doing such things. If Stephano wins 10 matches, this also means any /all zerg/s have to lose 10 matches (together), so we have 50% zerg winrate.
This also means you want punishment for better players and compensations for other zergs.
|
A year ago it was the other way around, TvP was heavily T favored mainly due to the buffed tank (50 -> 70 damage to armored, which most of the protoss units are).
But I don't remember the community whining so much about it. I'd like to know what is different this time then a year ago...
|
On December 25 2017 22:04 bulya wrote:
A year ago it was the other way around, TvP was heavily T favored mainly due to the buffed tank (50 -> 70 damage to armored, which most of the protoss units are).
But I don't remember the community whining so much about it. I'd like to know what is different this time then a year ago...
Because aligulac winrates don't tell the whole story. In GSL season 1 2017 (of which the majority was played before any patches) the TvP winrate was actually in favor of Protoss and also Stats reached the finals of IEM Gyeongi and IEM Katowice beating multiple top terrans in the process.
Now we haven't really seen any high level tournaments yet (except qualifiers) but just from watching/playing (actually using my brain instead of mindlessly looking at statistics) the balance seems to be much worse than back then.
I can't really imagine any terrans advancing far in big tournaments seeing how they get slaughtered in qualifiers/online tournaments.
|
On December 25 2017 22:59 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2017 22:04 bulya wrote:
A year ago it was the other way around, TvP was heavily T favored mainly due to the buffed tank (50 -> 70 damage to armored, which most of the protoss units are).
But I don't remember the community whining so much about it. I'd like to know what is different this time then a year ago... Because aligulac winrates don't tell the whole story. In GSL season 1 2017 (of which the majority was played before any patches) the TvP winrate was actually in favor of Protoss and also Stats reached the finals of IEM Gyeongi and IEM Katowice beating multiple top terrans in the process. Now we haven't really seen any high level tournaments yet (except qualifiers) but just from watching/playing (actually using my brain instead of mindlessly looking at statistics) the balance seems to be much worse than back then. I can't really imagine any terrans advancing far in big tournaments seeing how they get slaughtered in qualifiers/online tournaments.
Well from using my brain, it seems like the balance isn't much worse than back then.
Sure, you don't want to blindly use data, but I can just as easily claim that PvT was more imbalanced then as you can claim it is more imbalanced now.
Besides, Stats beat Maru 3-1 to get swept 0-4 in the first IEM. He did much better in Katowice because the balance was much better, going 2-1 TY, 3-1 Byun, and 3-4 TY. Also, PvT was in P favour on GSL Season 1 because Stats won. Take away his 3rd win against Innovation, and suddenly the winrates are even.
Now, I'm not going to claim that T isn't underpowered compared to P, but if they maintain a 45% winrate, then that's pretty close.
EDIT: Though, to be fair, if they struggle versus Zerg and Protoss as opposed to just Protoss, then yes, they will not go far in tournaments.
|
On December 25 2017 23:59 FrkFrJss wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2017 22:59 Charoisaur wrote:On December 25 2017 22:04 bulya wrote:
A year ago it was the other way around, TvP was heavily T favored mainly due to the buffed tank (50 -> 70 damage to armored, which most of the protoss units are).
But I don't remember the community whining so much about it. I'd like to know what is different this time then a year ago... Because aligulac winrates don't tell the whole story. In GSL season 1 2017 (of which the majority was played before any patches) the TvP winrate was actually in favor of Protoss and also Stats reached the finals of IEM Gyeongi and IEM Katowice beating multiple top terrans in the process. Now we haven't really seen any high level tournaments yet (except qualifiers) but just from watching/playing (actually using my brain instead of mindlessly looking at statistics) the balance seems to be much worse than back then. I can't really imagine any terrans advancing far in big tournaments seeing how they get slaughtered in qualifiers/online tournaments. Well from using my brain, it seems like the balance isn't much worse than back then. Sure, you don't want to blindly use data, but I can just as easily claim that PvT was more imbalanced then as you can claim it is more imbalanced now. Besides, Stats beat Maru 3-1 to get swept 0-4 in the first IEM. He did much better in Katowice because the balance was much better, going 2-1 TY, 3-1 Byun, and 3-4 TY. Also, PvT was in P favour on GSL Season 1 because Stats won. Take away his 3rd win against Innovation, and suddenly the winrates are even. Now, I'm not going to claim that T isn't underpowered compared to P, but if they maintain a 45% winrate, then that's pretty close. EDIT: Though, to be fair, if they struggle versus Zerg and Protoss as opposed to just Protoss, then yes, they will not go far in tournaments.
You may be right, we have to wait until tournaments start before we can draw conclusive evidence about the state of PvT.
I just think TvP in early 2017 was not nearly as bad as people quoting the 41% aligulac winrate want to believe.
|
On December 26 2017 00:31 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2017 23:59 FrkFrJss wrote:On December 25 2017 22:59 Charoisaur wrote:On December 25 2017 22:04 bulya wrote:
A year ago it was the other way around, TvP was heavily T favored mainly due to the buffed tank (50 -> 70 damage to armored, which most of the protoss units are).
But I don't remember the community whining so much about it. I'd like to know what is different this time then a year ago... Because aligulac winrates don't tell the whole story. In GSL season 1 2017 (of which the majority was played before any patches) the TvP winrate was actually in favor of Protoss and also Stats reached the finals of IEM Gyeongi and IEM Katowice beating multiple top terrans in the process. Now we haven't really seen any high level tournaments yet (except qualifiers) but just from watching/playing (actually using my brain instead of mindlessly looking at statistics) the balance seems to be much worse than back then. I can't really imagine any terrans advancing far in big tournaments seeing how they get slaughtered in qualifiers/online tournaments. Well from using my brain, it seems like the balance isn't much worse than back then. Sure, you don't want to blindly use data, but I can just as easily claim that PvT was more imbalanced then as you can claim it is more imbalanced now. Besides, Stats beat Maru 3-1 to get swept 0-4 in the first IEM. He did much better in Katowice because the balance was much better, going 2-1 TY, 3-1 Byun, and 3-4 TY. Also, PvT was in P favour on GSL Season 1 because Stats won. Take away his 3rd win against Innovation, and suddenly the winrates are even. Now, I'm not going to claim that T isn't underpowered compared to P, but if they maintain a 45% winrate, then that's pretty close. EDIT: Though, to be fair, if they struggle versus Zerg and Protoss as opposed to just Protoss, then yes, they will not go far in tournaments. You may be right, we have to wait until tournaments start before we can draw conclusive evidence about the state of PvT. I just think TvP in early 2017 was not nearly as bad as people quoting the 41% aligulac winrate want to believe.
No, I think we can conclude there is imbalance, but the extent of the imbalance is in question. Is it a 48/52 - 46/54 or is it like 45/55 and worse? And yes, the 41% winrate is probably overstated...though Protoss was having a really difficult time with liberators.
|
On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do.
try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often.
|
On December 26 2017 02:07 youngjiddle wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often.
Merry Christmas to you too!
In my experience, such character assassinations tend to say more about the poster than the target, but hey, if you want to spend your Christmas Day making petty flame posts, I wish you only the best. 
EDIT: Oh wait, you're the same guy who tried to flame me in the Protossed thread, aren't you?
On December 22 2017 02:24 youngjiddle wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2017 14:55 pvsnp wrote:
This line is obviously not referring to ladder losses, but rather community disgust towards Protoss bullshit at the highest levels of competitive SC2. Same goes for the rest of the article.
You're just attacking a strawman of "lol everyone who disagrees is a noob and needs to get good," and come off as a Protoss apologist (deliberately or not I will not speculate).
Now it's certainly possible, even probable, that the hostile comments and such are from people who hate Protoss as a result of losing on ladder........but that's an unproven (and unprovable) assumption. Characterizing them all as such without a shred of proof is the very definition of a strawman.
And I believe the popular term for Protoss "strategy" would be "bullshit."
Why that term is popular at all is the real question here. fuck off tbh
Yeah, I guess character assassination is actually an improvement from raw profanity in your case. Up your game man, I know you can do better!
@Tyrhanius
On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do.
I was referring to only the Stage 2 qualifiers, I somehow thought that TY and Maru made it to Stage 2. My bad, sorry about that. And I do agree with you that TvP is the problem here, TvZ is balanced pretty well atm.
Merry Christmas!
|
On December 26 2017 04:51 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2017 02:07 youngjiddle wrote:On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often. Merry Christmas to you too! In my experience, such character assassinations tend to say more about the poster than the target, but hey, if you want to spend your Christmas Day making petty flame posts, I wish you only the best. EDIT: Oh wait, you're the same guy who tried to flame me in the Protossed thread, aren't you? Show nested quote +On December 22 2017 02:24 youngjiddle wrote:On December 20 2017 14:55 pvsnp wrote:
This line is obviously not referring to ladder losses, but rather community disgust towards Protoss bullshit at the highest levels of competitive SC2. Same goes for the rest of the article.
You're just attacking a strawman of "lol everyone who disagrees is a noob and needs to get good," and come off as a Protoss apologist (deliberately or not I will not speculate).
Now it's certainly possible, even probable, that the hostile comments and such are from people who hate Protoss as a result of losing on ladder........but that's an unproven (and unprovable) assumption. Characterizing them all as such without a shred of proof is the very definition of a strawman.
And I believe the popular term for Protoss "strategy" would be "bullshit."
Why that term is popular at all is the real question here. fuck off tbh Yeah, I guess character assassination is actually an improvement from raw profanity in your case. Up your game man, I know you can do better! @Tyrhanius Show nested quote +On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. I was referring to only the Stage 2 qualifiers, I somehow thought that TY and Maru made it to Stage 2. My bad, sorry about that. And I do agree with you that TvP is the problem here, TvZ is balanced pretty well atm. Merry Christmas!
You copied and pasted only the "fuck off" part and left out all the other comments and context.
so my point still stands.
|
On December 25 2017 17:53 hiroshOne wrote:
Well they needed to buff hydras, especially as through whole pack of changes in Terran arsenal they threw mutas into oblivion in this matchup. I wonder how Z could ever win vs Terran concidering that Mutas are non existing strategy and if they nerfed hydras. Yeah. I bet it would be fine to wreck all Zergs on ladder with few drops...PvZ would be fine as well right? My god you are all so biased. Every time Zerg gets viable shit, I hear T and P whine. You got bunch of things that irritates Zergs as well, be aware of that.
how you can cry about drops lol, just put few hydras at locations like P does with stalkers and drops won't do shit, or your f2 reflex doesn't allow you to do so?
|
On December 26 2017 04:51 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2017 02:07 youngjiddle wrote:On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often. Merry Christmas to you too! In my experience, such character assassinations tend to say more about the poster than the target, but hey, if you want to spend your Christmas Day making petty flame posts, I wish you only the best. EDIT: Oh wait, you're the same guy who tried to flame me in the Protossed thread, aren't you? Show nested quote +On December 22 2017 02:24 youngjiddle wrote:On December 20 2017 14:55 pvsnp wrote:
This line is obviously not referring to ladder losses, but rather community disgust towards Protoss bullshit at the highest levels of competitive SC2. Same goes for the rest of the article.
You're just attacking a strawman of "lol everyone who disagrees is a noob and needs to get good," and come off as a Protoss apologist (deliberately or not I will not speculate).
Now it's certainly possible, even probable, that the hostile comments and such are from people who hate Protoss as a result of losing on ladder........but that's an unproven (and unprovable) assumption. Characterizing them all as such without a shred of proof is the very definition of a strawman.
And I believe the popular term for Protoss "strategy" would be "bullshit."
Why that term is popular at all is the real question here. fuck off tbh Yeah, I guess character assassination is actually an improvement from raw profanity in your case. Up your game man, I know you can do better! @Tyrhanius Show nested quote +On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. I was referring to only the Stage 2 qualifiers, I somehow thought that TY and Maru made it to Stage 2. My bad, sorry about that. And I do agree with you that TvP is the problem here, TvZ is balanced pretty well atm. Merry Christmas!
you provide really specific factual information about wins and losses that contradict someone else's narrative. so instead of attacking your fact-base logical argument they attack you. pretty boring. i'd prefer they provide a detailed explanation as to why some very skilled Terran players lost. They chose to end the discussion at that point with a personal attack. pretty boring.
at least there was some productive discourse at the very start. after that it devolved into something useless.
maybe their next strat will be "i'm ignoring you now".
|
On December 25 2017 17:53 hiroshOne wrote:
Well they needed to buff hydras, especially as through whole pack of changes in Terran arsenal they threw mutas into oblivion in this matchup. I wonder how Z could ever win vs Terran concidering that Mutas are non existing strategy and if they nerfed hydras. Yeah. I bet it would be fine to wreck all Zergs on ladder with few drops...PvZ would be fine as well right? My god you are all so biased. Every time Zerg gets viable shit, I hear T and P whine. You got bunch of things that irritates Zergs as well, be aware of that.
It's not hard to figure out how z was winning games without mutas go back and watch some early lotv games. Zerg would rush to ultras than a move to victory. The difference between now and than is just that Terran has a lot less opportunities when going bio to stop Zerg from reaching ultras. At least back before the hydra patch and queen range buffs Terran had more leeway in the midgame to get some kind of edge, now it's just very difficult vs good zergs to do enough dmg to stop them from reaching ultra currpter when going bio.
Note i say bio I think mech tvz is somewhat balanced (mabey a bit z favored but not grossly) it's just sad that bio is in such a poor state I much preferred how the game used to be with dynamic action packed bio games compared to the slower mech style we have now.
|
Funny how u totally ignored ultralisk nerf back then, and bunch of zerg nerfs and terran buffs nowadays. I really don't think that if Blizzard would nerf hydras, Zerg could defend till ultras. That's one. And even if somehow he could manage to survive till lategame, he has no bases, no economy to sustain lategame army, no map control and at the end ghosts still fuck ultras up. Especially with recent buff that disturbing snipe gives tham all energy back.
|
A hydras nerf would mean a big mech buff again and a big ZvP nerf.
As mention above, seen the good performance both T and P have done vs Zerg it seems really overkill.
|
On December 26 2017 10:37 youngjiddle wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2017 04:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 26 2017 02:07 youngjiddle wrote:On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often. Merry Christmas to you too! In my experience, such character assassinations tend to say more about the poster than the target, but hey, if you want to spend your Christmas Day making petty flame posts, I wish you only the best. EDIT: Oh wait, you're the same guy who tried to flame me in the Protossed thread, aren't you? On December 22 2017 02:24 youngjiddle wrote:On December 20 2017 14:55 pvsnp wrote:
This line is obviously not referring to ladder losses, but rather community disgust towards Protoss bullshit at the highest levels of competitive SC2. Same goes for the rest of the article.
You're just attacking a strawman of "lol everyone who disagrees is a noob and needs to get good," and come off as a Protoss apologist (deliberately or not I will not speculate).
Now it's certainly possible, even probable, that the hostile comments and such are from people who hate Protoss as a result of losing on ladder........but that's an unproven (and unprovable) assumption. Characterizing them all as such without a shred of proof is the very definition of a strawman.
And I believe the popular term for Protoss "strategy" would be "bullshit."
Why that term is popular at all is the real question here. fuck off tbh Yeah, I guess character assassination is actually an improvement from raw profanity in your case. Up your game man, I know you can do better! @Tyrhanius On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. I was referring to only the Stage 2 qualifiers, I somehow thought that TY and Maru made it to Stage 2. My bad, sorry about that. And I do agree with you that TvP is the problem here, TvZ is balanced pretty well atm. Merry Christmas! You copied and pasted only the "fuck off" part and left out all the other comments and context. so my point still stands.
Yes of course, I forgot that “fuck off” has a huge number of completely different meanings depending on the context. My bad.
Please, enlighten me as to what exactly you actually meant when you said “fuck off,” and how it isn’t actually raw profanity in the slightest.
Next you’ll be telling me that:
On December 26 2017 02:07 youngjiddle wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often.
is not actually an insult, but rather the highest of compliments.
|
On December 27 2017 03:17 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2017 10:37 youngjiddle wrote:On December 26 2017 04:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 26 2017 02:07 youngjiddle wrote:On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often. Merry Christmas to you too! In my experience, such character assassinations tend to say more about the poster than the target, but hey, if you want to spend your Christmas Day making petty flame posts, I wish you only the best. EDIT: Oh wait, you're the same guy who tried to flame me in the Protossed thread, aren't you? On December 22 2017 02:24 youngjiddle wrote:On December 20 2017 14:55 pvsnp wrote:
This line is obviously not referring to ladder losses, but rather community disgust towards Protoss bullshit at the highest levels of competitive SC2. Same goes for the rest of the article.
You're just attacking a strawman of "lol everyone who disagrees is a noob and needs to get good," and come off as a Protoss apologist (deliberately or not I will not speculate).
Now it's certainly possible, even probable, that the hostile comments and such are from people who hate Protoss as a result of losing on ladder........but that's an unproven (and unprovable) assumption. Characterizing them all as such without a shred of proof is the very definition of a strawman.
And I believe the popular term for Protoss "strategy" would be "bullshit."
Why that term is popular at all is the real question here. fuck off tbh Yeah, I guess character assassination is actually an improvement from raw profanity in your case. Up your game man, I know you can do better! @Tyrhanius On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. I was referring to only the Stage 2 qualifiers, I somehow thought that TY and Maru made it to Stage 2. My bad, sorry about that. And I do agree with you that TvP is the problem here, TvZ is balanced pretty well atm. Merry Christmas! You copied and pasted only the "fuck off" part and left out all the other comments and context. so my point still stands. Yes of course, I forgot that “fuck off” has a huge number of completely different meanings depending on the context. My bad. Please, enlighten me as to what exactly you actually meant when you said “fuck off,” and how it isn’t actually raw profanity in the slightest. Next you’ll be telling me that: Show nested quote +On December 26 2017 02:07 youngjiddle wrote:On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often. is not actually an insult, but rather the highest of compliments.
No. In the post where I say "fuck off", there was a larger conversations that lead up to the "fuck off" you still seem to ignore to push your point of me being an asshole. Your whole arguement was that protoss wins were "bullshit" and I was not buying it.
Again, you choose to ignore it and push your own reasoning based on incorrect facts, just like you did saying Terrans did not win a single non TvT above.
You just say things as factual but aren't even true, like I find it so funny when you say "At the pro level, bio is not really viable", yet I saw multiple terrans going bio at the gsl qualifier, like innovation, and winning. I don't understand where you get your facts.
More hilarious were your comments on the stalker, where you claimed the change to be massively imbalanced and claimed terrans would not win with the change. lo and behold winrates turned back to 52% and the race distribution has been balanced at the pro level.
|
On December 27 2017 11:09 youngjiddle wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2017 03:17 pvsnp wrote:On December 26 2017 10:37 youngjiddle wrote:On December 26 2017 04:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 26 2017 02:07 youngjiddle wrote:On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often. Merry Christmas to you too! In my experience, such character assassinations tend to say more about the poster than the target, but hey, if you want to spend your Christmas Day making petty flame posts, I wish you only the best. EDIT: Oh wait, you're the same guy who tried to flame me in the Protossed thread, aren't you? On December 22 2017 02:24 youngjiddle wrote:On December 20 2017 14:55 pvsnp wrote:
This line is obviously not referring to ladder losses, but rather community disgust towards Protoss bullshit at the highest levels of competitive SC2. Same goes for the rest of the article.
You're just attacking a strawman of "lol everyone who disagrees is a noob and needs to get good," and come off as a Protoss apologist (deliberately or not I will not speculate).
Now it's certainly possible, even probable, that the hostile comments and such are from people who hate Protoss as a result of losing on ladder........but that's an unproven (and unprovable) assumption. Characterizing them all as such without a shred of proof is the very definition of a strawman.
And I believe the popular term for Protoss "strategy" would be "bullshit."
Why that term is popular at all is the real question here. fuck off tbh Yeah, I guess character assassination is actually an improvement from raw profanity in your case. Up your game man, I know you can do better! @Tyrhanius On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. I was referring to only the Stage 2 qualifiers, I somehow thought that TY and Maru made it to Stage 2. My bad, sorry about that. And I do agree with you that TvP is the problem here, TvZ is balanced pretty well atm. Merry Christmas! You copied and pasted only the "fuck off" part and left out all the other comments and context. so my point still stands. Yes of course, I forgot that “fuck off” has a huge number of completely different meanings depending on the context. My bad. Please, enlighten me as to what exactly you actually meant when you said “fuck off,” and how it isn’t actually raw profanity in the slightest. Next you’ll be telling me that: On December 26 2017 02:07 youngjiddle wrote:On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often. is not actually an insult, but rather the highest of compliments. No. In the post where I say "fuck off", there was a larger conversations that lead up to the "fuck off" you still seem to ignore to push your point of me being an asshole. Your whole arguement was that protoss wins were "bullshit" and I was not buying it. Again, you choose to ignore it and push your own reasoning based on incorrect facts, just like you did saying Terrans did not win a single non TvT above. You just say things as factual but aren't even true, like I find it so funny when you say "At the pro level, bio is not really viable", yet I saw multiple terrans going bio at the gsl qualifier, like innovation, and winning. I don't understand where you get your facts. More hilarious were your comments on the stalker, where you claimed the change to be massively imbalanced and claimed terrans would not win with the change. lo and behold winrates turned back to 52% and the race distribution has been balanced at the pro level.
So are we going back to facts instead of insults? Sorry pal, that ship's already sailed.
It's true that your insults were part of a larger conversation, but it's a conversation which I no longer feel any need to engage in. Because there's no need to discuss seriously with anyone who routinely resorts to character assassination, unilaterally decides on a personal interpretation of reality, and attempts to impose it on me. I find it extremely amusing that you of all people are accusing me of misconstruing the facts when in this post alone you've done nothing more than construct and viciously assault a straw man of my position. The irony is overwhelming.
I'm more than happy to laugh at your fallacies, but is blatantly obvious that there's nothing of substance to be gained here. There is simply no point in trying to conduct a civil discussion with an uncivilized person.
In your own words, fuck off.
|
On December 27 2017 11:52 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2017 11:09 youngjiddle wrote:On December 27 2017 03:17 pvsnp wrote:On December 26 2017 10:37 youngjiddle wrote:On December 26 2017 04:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 26 2017 02:07 youngjiddle wrote:On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often. Merry Christmas to you too! In my experience, such character assassinations tend to say more about the poster than the target, but hey, if you want to spend your Christmas Day making petty flame posts, I wish you only the best. EDIT: Oh wait, you're the same guy who tried to flame me in the Protossed thread, aren't you? On December 22 2017 02:24 youngjiddle wrote:On December 20 2017 14:55 pvsnp wrote:
This line is obviously not referring to ladder losses, but rather community disgust towards Protoss bullshit at the highest levels of competitive SC2. Same goes for the rest of the article.
You're just attacking a strawman of "lol everyone who disagrees is a noob and needs to get good," and come off as a Protoss apologist (deliberately or not I will not speculate).
Now it's certainly possible, even probable, that the hostile comments and such are from people who hate Protoss as a result of losing on ladder........but that's an unproven (and unprovable) assumption. Characterizing them all as such without a shred of proof is the very definition of a strawman.
And I believe the popular term for Protoss "strategy" would be "bullshit."
Why that term is popular at all is the real question here. fuck off tbh Yeah, I guess character assassination is actually an improvement from raw profanity in your case. Up your game man, I know you can do better! @Tyrhanius On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. I was referring to only the Stage 2 qualifiers, I somehow thought that TY and Maru made it to Stage 2. My bad, sorry about that. And I do agree with you that TvP is the problem here, TvZ is balanced pretty well atm. Merry Christmas! You copied and pasted only the "fuck off" part and left out all the other comments and context. so my point still stands. Yes of course, I forgot that “fuck off” has a huge number of completely different meanings depending on the context. My bad. Please, enlighten me as to what exactly you actually meant when you said “fuck off,” and how it isn’t actually raw profanity in the slightest. Next you’ll be telling me that: On December 26 2017 02:07 youngjiddle wrote:On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often. is not actually an insult, but rather the highest of compliments. No. In the post where I say "fuck off", there was a larger conversations that lead up to the "fuck off" you still seem to ignore to push your point of me being an asshole. Your whole arguement was that protoss wins were "bullshit" and I was not buying it. Again, you choose to ignore it and push your own reasoning based on incorrect facts, just like you did saying Terrans did not win a single non TvT above. You just say things as factual but aren't even true, like I find it so funny when you say "At the pro level, bio is not really viable", yet I saw multiple terrans going bio at the gsl qualifier, like innovation, and winning. I don't understand where you get your facts. More hilarious were your comments on the stalker, where you claimed the change to be massively imbalanced and claimed terrans would not win with the change. lo and behold winrates turned back to 52% and the race distribution has been balanced at the pro level. So are we going back to facts instead of insults? Sorry pal, that ship's already sailed. It's true that your insults were part of a larger conversation, but it's a conversation which I no longer feel any need to engage in. Because there's no need to discuss seriously with anyone who routinely resorts to character assassination, unilaterally decides on a personal interpretation of reality, and attempts to impose it on me. I find it extremely amusing that you of all people are accusing me of misconstruing the facts when in this post alone you've done nothing more than construct and viciously assault a straw man of my position. The irony is overwhelming. I'm more than happy to laugh at your fallacies, but is blatantly obvious that there's nothing of substance to be gained here. There is simply no point in trying to conduct a civil discussion with an uncivilized person. In your own words, fuck off.
Lol dear god people get so angry talking about a game
|
On December 27 2017 14:01 starkiller123 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2017 11:52 pvsnp wrote:On December 27 2017 11:09 youngjiddle wrote:On December 27 2017 03:17 pvsnp wrote:On December 26 2017 10:37 youngjiddle wrote:On December 26 2017 04:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 26 2017 02:07 youngjiddle wrote:On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often. Merry Christmas to you too! In my experience, such character assassinations tend to say more about the poster than the target, but hey, if you want to spend your Christmas Day making petty flame posts, I wish you only the best. EDIT: Oh wait, you're the same guy who tried to flame me in the Protossed thread, aren't you? On December 22 2017 02:24 youngjiddle wrote:On December 20 2017 14:55 pvsnp wrote:
This line is obviously not referring to ladder losses, but rather community disgust towards Protoss bullshit at the highest levels of competitive SC2. Same goes for the rest of the article.
You're just attacking a strawman of "lol everyone who disagrees is a noob and needs to get good," and come off as a Protoss apologist (deliberately or not I will not speculate).
Now it's certainly possible, even probable, that the hostile comments and such are from people who hate Protoss as a result of losing on ladder........but that's an unproven (and unprovable) assumption. Characterizing them all as such without a shred of proof is the very definition of a strawman.
And I believe the popular term for Protoss "strategy" would be "bullshit."
Why that term is popular at all is the real question here. fuck off tbh Yeah, I guess character assassination is actually an improvement from raw profanity in your case. Up your game man, I know you can do better! @Tyrhanius On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. I was referring to only the Stage 2 qualifiers, I somehow thought that TY and Maru made it to Stage 2. My bad, sorry about that. And I do agree with you that TvP is the problem here, TvZ is balanced pretty well atm. Merry Christmas! You copied and pasted only the "fuck off" part and left out all the other comments and context. so my point still stands. Yes of course, I forgot that “fuck off” has a huge number of completely different meanings depending on the context. My bad. Please, enlighten me as to what exactly you actually meant when you said “fuck off,” and how it isn’t actually raw profanity in the slightest. Next you’ll be telling me that: On December 26 2017 02:07 youngjiddle wrote:On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often. is not actually an insult, but rather the highest of compliments. No. In the post where I say "fuck off", there was a larger conversations that lead up to the "fuck off" you still seem to ignore to push your point of me being an asshole. Your whole arguement was that protoss wins were "bullshit" and I was not buying it. Again, you choose to ignore it and push your own reasoning based on incorrect facts, just like you did saying Terrans did not win a single non TvT above. You just say things as factual but aren't even true, like I find it so funny when you say "At the pro level, bio is not really viable", yet I saw multiple terrans going bio at the gsl qualifier, like innovation, and winning. I don't understand where you get your facts. More hilarious were your comments on the stalker, where you claimed the change to be massively imbalanced and claimed terrans would not win with the change. lo and behold winrates turned back to 52% and the race distribution has been balanced at the pro level. So are we going back to facts instead of insults? Sorry pal, that ship's already sailed. It's true that your insults were part of a larger conversation, but it's a conversation which I no longer feel any need to engage in. Because there's no need to discuss seriously with anyone who routinely resorts to character assassination, unilaterally decides on a personal interpretation of reality, and attempts to impose it on me. I find it extremely amusing that you of all people are accusing me of misconstruing the facts when in this post alone you've done nothing more than construct and viciously assault a straw man of my position. The irony is overwhelming. I'm more than happy to laugh at your fallacies, but is blatantly obvious that there's nothing of substance to be gained here. There is simply no point in trying to conduct a civil discussion with an uncivilized person. In your own words, fuck off. Lol dear god people get so angry talking about a game
My Christmas hangover got worse over the day, makes me tetchy. 
|
On December 27 2017 11:52 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2017 11:09 youngjiddle wrote:On December 27 2017 03:17 pvsnp wrote:On December 26 2017 10:37 youngjiddle wrote:On December 26 2017 04:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 26 2017 02:07 youngjiddle wrote:On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often. Merry Christmas to you too! In my experience, such character assassinations tend to say more about the poster than the target, but hey, if you want to spend your Christmas Day making petty flame posts, I wish you only the best. EDIT: Oh wait, you're the same guy who tried to flame me in the Protossed thread, aren't you? On December 22 2017 02:24 youngjiddle wrote:On December 20 2017 14:55 pvsnp wrote:
This line is obviously not referring to ladder losses, but rather community disgust towards Protoss bullshit at the highest levels of competitive SC2. Same goes for the rest of the article.
You're just attacking a strawman of "lol everyone who disagrees is a noob and needs to get good," and come off as a Protoss apologist (deliberately or not I will not speculate).
Now it's certainly possible, even probable, that the hostile comments and such are from people who hate Protoss as a result of losing on ladder........but that's an unproven (and unprovable) assumption. Characterizing them all as such without a shred of proof is the very definition of a strawman.
And I believe the popular term for Protoss "strategy" would be "bullshit."
Why that term is popular at all is the real question here. fuck off tbh Yeah, I guess character assassination is actually an improvement from raw profanity in your case. Up your game man, I know you can do better! @Tyrhanius On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. I was referring to only the Stage 2 qualifiers, I somehow thought that TY and Maru made it to Stage 2. My bad, sorry about that. And I do agree with you that TvP is the problem here, TvZ is balanced pretty well atm. Merry Christmas! You copied and pasted only the "fuck off" part and left out all the other comments and context. so my point still stands. Yes of course, I forgot that “fuck off” has a huge number of completely different meanings depending on the context. My bad. Please, enlighten me as to what exactly you actually meant when you said “fuck off,” and how it isn’t actually raw profanity in the slightest. Next you’ll be telling me that: On December 26 2017 02:07 youngjiddle wrote:On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often. is not actually an insult, but rather the highest of compliments. No. In the post where I say "fuck off", there was a larger conversations that lead up to the "fuck off" you still seem to ignore to push your point of me being an asshole. Your whole arguement was that protoss wins were "bullshit" and I was not buying it. Again, you choose to ignore it and push your own reasoning based on incorrect facts, just like you did saying Terrans did not win a single non TvT above. You just say things as factual but aren't even true, like I find it so funny when you say "At the pro level, bio is not really viable", yet I saw multiple terrans going bio at the gsl qualifier, like innovation, and winning. I don't understand where you get your facts. More hilarious were your comments on the stalker, where you claimed the change to be massively imbalanced and claimed terrans would not win with the change. lo and behold winrates turned back to 52% and the race distribution has been balanced at the pro level. So are we going back to facts instead of insults? Sorry pal, that ship's already sailed. It's true that your insults were part of a larger conversation, but it's a conversation which I no longer feel any need to engage in. Because there's no need to discuss seriously with anyone who routinely resorts to character assassination, unilaterally decides on a personal interpretation of reality, and attempts to impose it on me. I find it extremely amusing that you of all people are accusing me of misconstruing the facts when in this post alone you've done nothing more than construct and viciously assault a straw man of my position. The irony is overwhelming. I'm more than happy to laugh at your fallacies, but is blatantly obvious that there's nothing of substance to be gained here. There is simply no point in trying to conduct a civil discussion with an uncivilized person. In your own words, fuck off.
tip tip tip tip tip m' lady
|
everybody complaining about theses patches. But marines, banelings and adepts are still broken like...forever \m/
|
On December 28 2017 00:57 StarscreamG1 wrote:
everybody complaining about theses patches. But marines, banelings and adepts are still broken like...forever \m/
How so? Bio prity much sucks at the pro level right now, adepts got nerfed awhile back and are not really matchup defining in any mu. Banes might need to be looked at if blizzard adjusts hydra bane to make bio better and help Protoss in pvz. But I don't understand your post.
|
On December 27 2017 22:57 youngjiddle wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2017 11:52 pvsnp wrote:On December 27 2017 11:09 youngjiddle wrote:On December 27 2017 03:17 pvsnp wrote:On December 26 2017 10:37 youngjiddle wrote:On December 26 2017 04:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 26 2017 02:07 youngjiddle wrote:On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often. Merry Christmas to you too! In my experience, such character assassinations tend to say more about the poster than the target, but hey, if you want to spend your Christmas Day making petty flame posts, I wish you only the best. EDIT: Oh wait, you're the same guy who tried to flame me in the Protossed thread, aren't you? On December 22 2017 02:24 youngjiddle wrote:On December 20 2017 14:55 pvsnp wrote:
This line is obviously not referring to ladder losses, but rather community disgust towards Protoss bullshit at the highest levels of competitive SC2. Same goes for the rest of the article.
You're just attacking a strawman of "lol everyone who disagrees is a noob and needs to get good," and come off as a Protoss apologist (deliberately or not I will not speculate).
Now it's certainly possible, even probable, that the hostile comments and such are from people who hate Protoss as a result of losing on ladder........but that's an unproven (and unprovable) assumption. Characterizing them all as such without a shred of proof is the very definition of a strawman.
And I believe the popular term for Protoss "strategy" would be "bullshit."
Why that term is popular at all is the real question here. fuck off tbh Yeah, I guess character assassination is actually an improvement from raw profanity in your case. Up your game man, I know you can do better! @Tyrhanius On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. I was referring to only the Stage 2 qualifiers, I somehow thought that TY and Maru made it to Stage 2. My bad, sorry about that. And I do agree with you that TvP is the problem here, TvZ is balanced pretty well atm. Merry Christmas! You copied and pasted only the "fuck off" part and left out all the other comments and context. so my point still stands. Yes of course, I forgot that “fuck off” has a huge number of completely different meanings depending on the context. My bad. Please, enlighten me as to what exactly you actually meant when you said “fuck off,” and how it isn’t actually raw profanity in the slightest. Next you’ll be telling me that: On December 26 2017 02:07 youngjiddle wrote:On December 25 2017 18:07 Tyrhanius wrote:On December 25 2017 10:51 pvsnp wrote:On December 24 2017 17:28 Tyrhanius wrote:
Just a reminder that :
Rogue lost vs Bunny, Dark lost vs SoS, impact and solar vs Innovation, byul lost vs Zest, Soo lost vs Classic and gumiho.
That's clear Zerg isn't OP in any MU. Just a reminder that in that very same qualifier, exactly one Terran won exactly one series that was not a TvT (Gumiho beat soO). Every other time a Terran played a Protoss or Zerg, they lost. So TY, Maru, Inno, etc all failed to win a series over any Protoss or Zerg (mostly Protoss). Oh, and both qualifying matches were PvP, which obviously led to both qualified players being Protoss. Before the qualifier I was thinking Protoss needed some help, afterward I'm thinking some nerfs might be in order, especially with PvT. The IEM qualifier didn't have much in the way of PvZ, though I hear Protoss still struggles quite a bit there. Regardless of the actual balance state. we most likely won't get any changes until around January 5th or so, what with the holiday season. Why lying like that and say there is only a single non TvT won by a T ? Except Bunny 2-1 Dear, Gumiho 2-1 Creator, innovation has beaten solar and impact, Maru 2-1Patience, Ryung 2-0 Trap, + Bunny vs Rogue and gumiho vs soo. We all can see good T are all stopped by a good Protoss, no need to lie and to pretend they're doing worst that they actually do. try to just ignore pvsnp, I've found him to be the most biased and stupid balance whiner on these forums since I've started posting more often. is not actually an insult, but rather the highest of compliments. No. In the post where I say "fuck off", there was a larger conversations that lead up to the "fuck off" you still seem to ignore to push your point of me being an asshole. Your whole arguement was that protoss wins were "bullshit" and I was not buying it. Again, you choose to ignore it and push your own reasoning based on incorrect facts, just like you did saying Terrans did not win a single non TvT above. You just say things as factual but aren't even true, like I find it so funny when you say "At the pro level, bio is not really viable", yet I saw multiple terrans going bio at the gsl qualifier, like innovation, and winning. I don't understand where you get your facts. More hilarious were your comments on the stalker, where you claimed the change to be massively imbalanced and claimed terrans would not win with the change. lo and behold winrates turned back to 52% and the race distribution has been balanced at the pro level. So are we going back to facts instead of insults? Sorry pal, that ship's already sailed. It's true that your insults were part of a larger conversation, but it's a conversation which I no longer feel any need to engage in. Because there's no need to discuss seriously with anyone who routinely resorts to character assassination, unilaterally decides on a personal interpretation of reality, and attempts to impose it on me. I find it extremely amusing that you of all people are accusing me of misconstruing the facts when in this post alone you've done nothing more than construct and viciously assault a straw man of my position. The irony is overwhelming. I'm more than happy to laugh at your fallacies, but is blatantly obvious that there's nothing of substance to be gained here. There is simply no point in trying to conduct a civil discussion with an uncivilized person. In your own words, fuck off. tip tip tip tip tip m' lady
Thanks for proving my point.
|
Does Blizzard know that their matchmaking kills their game?
Look at that:
https://imgur.com/a/8FMiG
What happened here, is that me and someone else had to play with an absolute beginner. Opponent had one disconnect before start, hence they got increased income, while we had that guy that we somehow tried to adapt to and integrate into our game, which was not possible in no way. We lost to P air after all with double zerg, while he blocked expansions. When he left I got 10k mins, even though he almost gathered nothing with the 6-7 drones he had on his bases each.
The question that comes up is, why is that? Why do long term players have to play with/agains starters constantly? Is that some left wing equality shit?
I know that noone enjoys that kind of matchmaking. Why can't players play with/against others on similar rank?
I started playing 3v3 rt a few weeks ago at platin1 and played up to master2. What I can say and observe again is that your own rank barely makes any difference in what kind of match you get, of course the average is increasing, but deveations stay huge. It is mostly random at the end of the day and you never know what you get.
However what I observe as well is that the more similar the teams/opponents ranks are the more fun it is to play. Furthermore it took me ages to get out of platin1/diamond3 cause these games were fully random and you cannot predict team/opponent behaviour at all on that level, they do random stuff all day. Whenever I got streaks of games with/against similar/same rank my results improved alot and I advanced into higher leagues fast. Actually MM should be the other way round. You should get out fast from bottom leagues, as an advanced player, and then progress should slow down, not the other way round.
For me and many others that kind of gameplay is a full waste of time and a fun killer and not what we are looking for when playing starcraft. Is there any chance that can be improved?
As well 1on1 should be counted into team game MMR, as that is the most important factor for the skill of a player, just as I suggested some pages before.
Another problem is that skill is distributed randomly amongst leages and ranks. You find 1on1 GM players on diamond 3 3v3rt and you find people that have started SC2 with f2p patch on diamond 3. The same is true with master 1-3. The rank of a player in 3v3 rt does only to a very small extent represent his skill.
Both of these problems mixed together create the nightmare of matchmaking that SC2 is. I have decided that it is not worth my time and turn my back to it again, even tho I'd like to play some SC2 in general.
|
On January 02 2018 10:52 LSN wrote:Does Blizzard know that their matchmaking kills their game? Look at that: https://imgur.com/a/8FMiGWhat happened here, is that me and someone else had to play with an absolute beginner. Opponent had one disconnect before start, hence they got increased income, while we had that guy that we somehow tried to adapt to and integrate into our game, which was not possible in no way. We lost to P air after all with double zerg, while he blocked expansions. When he left I got 10k mins, even though he almost gathered nothing with the 6-7 drones he had on his bases each. The question that comes up is, why is that? Why do long term players have to play with/agains starters constantly? Is that some left wing equality shit? I know that noone enjoys that kind of matchmaking. Why can't players play with/against others on similar rank? I started playing 3v3 rt a few weeks ago at platin1 and played up to master2. What I can say and observe again is that your own rank barely makes any difference in what kind of match you get, of course the average is increasing, but deveations stay huge. It is mostly random at the end of the day and you never know what you get. However what I observe as well is that the more similar the teams/opponents ranks are the more fun it is to play. Furthermore it took me ages to get out of platin1/diamond3 cause these games were fully random and you cannot predict team/opponent behaviour at all on that level, they do random stuff all day. Whenever I got streaks of games with/against similar/same rank my results improved alot and I advanced into higher leagues fast. Actually MM should be the other way round. You should get out fast from bottom leagues, as an advanced player, and then progress should slow down, not the other way round. For me and many others that kind of gameplay is a full waste of time and a fun killer and not what we are looking for when playing starcraft. Is there any chance that can be improved? As well 1on1 should be counted into team game MMR, as that is the most important factor for the skill of a player, just as I suggested some pages before. Another problem is that skill is distributed randomly amongst leages and ranks. You find 1on1 GM players on diamond 3 3v3rt and you find people that have started SC2 with f2p patch on diamond 3. The same is true with master 1-3. The rank of a player in 3v3 rt does only to a very small extent represent his skill. Both of these problems mixed together create the nightmare of matchmaking that SC2 is. I have decided that it is not worth my time and turn my back to it again, even tho I'd like to play some SC2 in general.
thanks for sharing, its 3v3 lol no one takes it seriously
|
Well the only option is to play 1on1 or fixed teams then, which is both way too serious for me at that point of time.
Let me provide a solution:
The whole teamgame system and ranking must be recreated from scratch.
- 3on3/4on4 fixed team is almost impossible to arrange anyway. Who can play with always the same 2-3 mates? I know noone. 2on2 is possible, as you only have to arrange with one guy.
SC2 requires a new system which allows players to use the same rank in RT and fixed team. That "skill level" of a player should be composed of the ingredients that I already showed some pages above.
That creates the opportunity to make teamgames fun, real challenging and more easily accessible for anyone, high level players included, which then would not have to grind through the low levels. As well you could play fixed team games without having to do placement matches every time you swap a player.
|
i hope they release a final expansion that incorporates all the balance stuff learned from wol, hots, and lotv
|
All big tournaments are in the 1v1 format, and the game is balanced for it. It's all about early aggression and allins in teamgames, since aggressive early game play can utilize multiple teammates, while defensive play can only protect one self. This is why teamgames are all about rushes and allins, and also why you see people who are bronze/silver in 1v1 get to diamond/masters in teamgames. Grinding early game cheese is much more effective in teamgames than in 1v1, which makes build diversity lacking, which means the only people left interested are the ones that enjoy grinding cheese.
I don't think your solutions to teamgames will solve anything. The player skill spread in teamgames is caused by few players, and few players are caused by low interest, which is caused by teamgames most of the time end up to be rush cesspools and 1-base play.
What you really need is a teamgame-specific balance, which probably won't be very compatible with 1v1. This is obviously not a very good solution either, and people have thought about this for a long time now, and most people have reached the conclusion that teamgames are nothing but casual fun that only gets worse the more players you add.
...Or blizzard already solved the problem with people wanting to play together and created Co-op with missions actually designed for multiple people.
|
On January 02 2018 10:52 LSN wrote:Does Blizzard know that their matchmaking kills their game? Look at that: https://imgur.com/a/8FMiGWhat happened here, is that me and someone else had to play with an absolute beginner. Opponent had one disconnect before start, hence they got increased income, while we had that guy that we somehow tried to adapt to and integrate into our game, which was not possible in no way. We lost to P air after all with double zerg, while he blocked expansions. When he left I got 10k mins, even though he almost gathered nothing with the 6-7 drones he had on his bases each. The question that comes up is, why is that? Why do long term players have to play with/agains starters constantly? Is that some left wing equality shit? I know that noone enjoys that kind of matchmaking. Why can't players play with/against others on similar rank? I started playing 3v3 rt a few weeks ago at platin1 and played up to master2. What I can say and observe again is that your own rank barely makes any difference in what kind of match you get, of course the average is increasing, but deveations stay huge. It is mostly random at the end of the day and you never know what you get. However what I observe as well is that the more similar the teams/opponents ranks are the more fun it is to play. Furthermore it took me ages to get out of platin1/diamond3 cause these games were fully random and you cannot predict team/opponent behaviour at all on that level, they do random stuff all day. Whenever I got streaks of games with/against similar/same rank my results improved alot and I advanced into higher leagues fast. Actually MM should be the other way round. You should get out fast from bottom leagues, as an advanced player, and then progress should slow down, not the other way round. For me and many others that kind of gameplay is a full waste of time and a fun killer and not what we are looking for when playing starcraft. Is there any chance that can be improved? As well 1on1 should be counted into team game MMR, as that is the most important factor for the skill of a player, just as I suggested some pages before. Another problem is that skill is distributed randomly amongst leages and ranks. You find 1on1 GM players on diamond 3 3v3rt and you find people that have started SC2 with f2p patch on diamond 3. The same is true with master 1-3. The rank of a player in 3v3 rt does only to a very small extent represent his skill. Both of these problems mixed together create the nightmare of matchmaking that SC2 is. I have decided that it is not worth my time and turn my back to it again, even tho I'd like to play some SC2 in general.
Everyone knows only the 1v1 skill matters, the teamleague rank doesn't matter.
But it's quite paradoxal, because people play teamgames because it's easier to get master compared to reaching 1v1 master, but they complain that they are matched vs real 1v1 master and loses.
It seems :
"I play teamgames to farm noobs, but sometimes i'm myself the noob who got farmed and now it's frustrating lol."
Honestly, when i've faced Demuslin on 4v4 i wasn't like "woo it's so imbalance", but "Well it's cool to get matched vs some pro", but you imagine he destroyed us.
But sometimes you don't get a GM but a beginner, that's the game ^^
Also, better matchmaking would mean 20-30min to find a game.
|
On January 02 2018 16:56 WaesumNinja wrote:
All big tournaments are in the 1v1 format, and the game is balanced for it. It's all about early aggression and allins in teamgames, since aggressive early game play can utilize multiple teammates, while defensive play can only protect one self. This is why teamgames are all about rushes and allins, and also why you see people who are bronze/silver in 1v1 get to diamond/masters in teamgames. Grinding early game cheese is much more effective in teamgames than in 1v1, which makes build diversity lacking, which means the only people left interested are the ones that enjoy grinding cheese.
I don't think your solutions to teamgames will solve anything. The player skill spread in teamgames is caused by few players, and few players are caused by low interest, which is caused by teamgames most of the time end up to be rush cesspools and 1-base play.
What you really need is a teamgame-specific balance, which probably won't be very compatible with 1v1. This is obviously not a very good solution either, and people have thought about this for a long time now, and most people have reached the conclusion that teamgames are nothing but casual fun that only gets worse the more players you add.
...Or blizzard already solved the problem with people wanting to play together and created Co-op with missions actually designed for multiple people.
the only people left interested are the ones that enjoy grinding cheese
I am pretty sure that is wrong. TGs are good to interest new players to the game. I assume there are way more casual players than pro players and teamgames are played way more than 1on1s overall.
The player skill spread in teamgames is caused by few players, and few players are caused by low interest, which is caused by teamgames most of the time end up to be rush cesspools and 1-base play.
Thats wrong. Skill spread is due to cluttering of TGs. Barely anyone has enough time/will to play enough games of each TG mode so that their rank can come close to their skill. 22rt, 33rt, 44rt, 22 with bob, 22 with sally, 33 with bob and sally, 33 with bob and anton, 33 with sally and anton, 4on4 with with bob sally and anton, ....
Thats what I provide solution for. It was dump from beginning to clutter it up that much. What I suggest is 1 rank for each 22/33/44 for each player/race, no matter if they plays RT or fixed, that is based on 1on1 to a good extend when available.
most people have reached the conclusion that teamgames are nothing but casual fun that only gets worse the more players you add.
Exactly! But that it must be that way is just a belief. It doesn't require a seperate balance and I would not enjoy/play that at all if it got that.
@Tyrhanius
Everyone knows only the 1v1 skill matters, the teamleague rank doesn't matter.
Exactly that is going to be adressed. Then TG rank will matter more. Anyway TG rank does not know about that only the 1on1 skill matters, which is one source of problems.
But it's quite paradoxal, because people play teamgames because it's easier to get master compared to reaching 1v1 master
Thats wrong. Ppl play TGs over 1on1 as it puts less burden on their shoulders and hence is more casual. As well there is the soccer vs. tennis effect or lets call it dota vs. sc2 effect. It is about socializing, team interactions which, which make it more complex and less predictable. All those things and more of that kind. Abusers are minority I am sure.
Also, better matchmaking would mean 20-30min to find a game.
Thats obviously wrong. More than half of the deal about TG MM is to just put players on ranks that equal their skills more, without changing anything else. That would improve QOL alot already without changing anything about time it takes for MM to find players.
The second thing is to reduce deviations in MM, which would ofc increase times to find games, but not that much.
Third. If these changes that I suggest are implemented, more players will play TGs, as it will be more fun then, which will nullify the effect from above mostly or even in total will reduce time required.
|
On January 02 2018 17:38 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +most people have reached the conclusion that teamgames are nothing but casual fun that only gets worse the more players you add. Exactly! But that it must be that way is just a belief.
Not in my experience, and I've been playing teamgames with my friends since beta...
|
What you experience is the multiplication of deviance and players ranked off their skill level which ofc. gets more terrible the more players you add exponentially.
What I suggest fixes that. I want e. g. 1on1 GM players not to start at the bottom but be put on higher ranks in TGs. Especially all those guys who mostly/only play 1on1 and a very few time play teamgames can help TGs upper ranks to find higher quality games faster as those guys don't have to start in diamond 3 the few times they play teamgames, which overall will make them play more teamgames too - which then allows faster player finding of MM on higher ranks in return that will allow to reduce deviations.
Teamgames being shit and less and less good players playing teamgames go hand in hand and that must be broken off. Believing that it must be that way remains a belief.
|
Russian Federation205 Posts
http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/
Balance for december
PvT 53 % , which is much better than people react
PvZ 42 % , which nobody care seems to be
Terrans whined hard in november with 54 % PvT , and protoss should shut their up with 42 % pvz ?
|
On January 02 2018 18:48 Rail_sc2 wrote:http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/Balance for december PvT 53 % , which is much better than people react PvZ 42 % , which nobody care seems to be Terrans whined hard in november with 54 % PvT , and protoss should shut their up with 42 % pvz ?
And latest report : PvZ 48,6%.
And if you look GSL qualifier, Protoss have done really well.
Aslo, if you watch the league distribution, Zerg is now the least played race, and not Protoss anymore.
With 16tournaments won compared to 13 for T and Z, best foreigner is a T who has switched to P, and a long list of dude who sucessfully switch from another race to P, like classic, we can say P is the most sucessful race on LOTV (and on SC2 on general).
So yeah, not surprising they are not buffing protoss from just one aligulac report which is now around 50%.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On January 03 2018 00:38 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On January 02 2018 18:48 Rail_sc2 wrote:http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/Balance for december PvT 53 % , which is much better than people react PvZ 42 % , which nobody care seems to be Terrans whined hard in november with 54 % PvT , and protoss should shut their up with 42 % pvz ? And latest report : PvZ 48,6%. And if you look GSL qualifier, Protoss have done really well. Aslo, if you watch the league distribution, Zerg is now the least played race, and not Protoss anymore. With 16tournaments won compared to 13 for T and Z, best foreigner is a T who has switched to P, and a long list of dude who sucessfully switch from another race to P, like classic, we can say P is the most sucessful race on LOTV (and on SC2 on general). So yeah, not surprising they are not buffing protoss from just one aligulac report which is now around 50%.
Classic switched long before LoTV, so let's leave him out of this. There were other players who should have switched when their chosen race wasn't suited for their style *cough* Flash *cough*
|
On January 03 2018 01:43 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2018 00:38 Tyrhanius wrote:On January 02 2018 18:48 Rail_sc2 wrote:http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/Balance for december PvT 53 % , which is much better than people react PvZ 42 % , which nobody care seems to be Terrans whined hard in november with 54 % PvT , and protoss should shut their up with 42 % pvz ? And latest report : PvZ 48,6%. And if you look GSL qualifier, Protoss have done really well. Aslo, if you watch the league distribution, Zerg is now the least played race, and not Protoss anymore. With 16tournaments won compared to 13 for T and Z, best foreigner is a T who has switched to P, and a long list of dude who sucessfully switch from another race to P, like classic, we can say P is the most sucessful race on LOTV (and on SC2 on general). So yeah, not surprising they are not buffing protoss from just one aligulac report which is now around 50%. Classic switched long before LoTV, so let's leave him out of this. There were other players who should have switched when their chosen race wasn't suited for their style *cough* Flash *cough*
The point is no Protoss, has switched to Z or T or decide to offrace to win a miror.
|
On January 03 2018 02:58 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2018 01:43 deacon.frost wrote:On January 03 2018 00:38 Tyrhanius wrote:On January 02 2018 18:48 Rail_sc2 wrote:http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/Balance for december PvT 53 % , which is much better than people react PvZ 42 % , which nobody care seems to be Terrans whined hard in november with 54 % PvT , and protoss should shut their up with 42 % pvz ? And latest report : PvZ 48,6%. And if you look GSL qualifier, Protoss have done really well. Aslo, if you watch the league distribution, Zerg is now the least played race, and not Protoss anymore. With 16tournaments won compared to 13 for T and Z, best foreigner is a T who has switched to P, and a long list of dude who sucessfully switch from another race to P, like classic, we can say P is the most sucessful race on LOTV (and on SC2 on general). So yeah, not surprising they are not buffing protoss from just one aligulac report which is now around 50%. Classic switched long before LoTV, so let's leave him out of this. There were other players who should have switched when their chosen race wasn't suited for their style *cough* Flash *cough* The point is no Protoss, has switched to Z or T or decide to offrace to win a miror.
This discussion has no point, trying to prove a race's viability because two pros switched races before lotv? Give me a break.
Anyways, Byun switched off Protoss long ago, so there you go.
|
TvP is broken. I can't' live with that. Give me some balance, give me something.
|
On January 03 2018 02:58 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2018 01:43 deacon.frost wrote:On January 03 2018 00:38 Tyrhanius wrote:On January 02 2018 18:48 Rail_sc2 wrote:http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/Balance for december PvT 53 % , which is much better than people react PvZ 42 % , which nobody care seems to be Terrans whined hard in november with 54 % PvT , and protoss should shut their up with 42 % pvz ? And latest report : PvZ 48,6%. And if you look GSL qualifier, Protoss have done really well. Aslo, if you watch the league distribution, Zerg is now the least played race, and not Protoss anymore. With 16tournaments won compared to 13 for T and Z, best foreigner is a T who has switched to P, and a long list of dude who sucessfully switch from another race to P, like classic, we can say P is the most sucessful race on LOTV (and on SC2 on general). So yeah, not surprising they are not buffing protoss from just one aligulac report which is now around 50%. Classic switched long before LoTV, so let's leave him out of this. There were other players who should have switched when their chosen race wasn't suited for their style *cough* Flash *cough* The point is no Protoss, has switched to Z or T or decide to offrace to win a miror.
ByuN??
|
|
|
Nowadays T needs to mass MMM, libs and ghosts before attack. Play defensive with bio.... and that sucks. But is the only way.
|
On January 02 2018 10:52 LSN wrote:Does Blizzard know that their matchmaking kills their game? Look at that: https://imgur.com/a/8FMiGWhat happened here, is that me and someone else had to play with an absolute beginner. Opponent had one disconnect before start, hence they got increased income, while we had that guy that we somehow tried to adapt to and integrate into our game, which was not possible in no way. We lost to P air after all with double zerg, while he blocked expansions. When he left I got 10k mins, even though he almost gathered nothing with the 6-7 drones he had on his bases each. The question that comes up is, why is that? Why do long term players have to play with/agains starters constantly? Is that some left wing equality shit?I know that noone enjoys that kind of matchmaking. Why can't players play with/against others on similar rank? I started playing 3v3 rt a few weeks ago at platin1 and played up to master2. What I can say and observe again is that your own rank barely makes any difference in what kind of match you get, of course the average is increasing, but deveations stay huge. It is mostly random at the end of the day and you never know what you get. However what I observe as well is that the more similar the teams/opponents ranks are the more fun it is to play. Furthermore it took me ages to get out of platin1/diamond3 cause these games were fully random and you cannot predict team/opponent behaviour at all on that level, they do random stuff all day. Whenever I got streaks of games with/against similar/same rank my results improved alot and I advanced into higher leagues fast. Actually MM should be the other way round. You should get out fast from bottom leagues, as an advanced player, and then progress should slow down, not the other way round. For me and many others that kind of gameplay is a full waste of time and a fun killer and not what we are looking for when playing starcraft. Is there any chance that can be improved? As well 1on1 should be counted into team game MMR, as that is the most important factor for the skill of a player, just as I suggested some pages before. Another problem is that skill is distributed randomly amongst leages and ranks. You find 1on1 GM players on diamond 3 3v3rt and you find people that have started SC2 with f2p patch on diamond 3. The same is true with master 1-3. The rank of a player in 3v3 rt does only to a very small extent represent his skill. Both of these problems mixed together create the nightmare of matchmaking that SC2 is. I have decided that it is not worth my time and turn my back to it again, even tho I'd like to play some SC2 in general. Posts like this are a fascinating insight into the utterly broken view some people have of the world
Matchmaker for large team matches is weird sometimes? Must be the liberal agenda!
|
But i love how both Tempest & Range-Prism are "bad designed" while Tempest is here only to counter high-range Liberator & Broodlord, and that prism range is here only so protoss can have an acceptable drop tool compared to medivac, and so it can survive vs sniper Queen. Also, Prism Range is'nt what make drop disru strong.
At some point they will realize that nerfing all air units across the board and redesigning from there would result in a better game. Not sure how long it will take, though.
When you nerf air you make the terrain matter more again. This is a good thing. Adding bonuses for highground would also help, but nerfing air is where it starts.
|
Funny thing is that the issues terran faces will only get worse.
Mainly because protosses are still figuring out playing without battery, allowing terrans to deal damage with timings, and that some zergs don't get that full hydras with few vipers counter most mech compositions.
I don't see mech compositions performing decently without a viper nerf to match the raven nerf, i don't see bio compositions working decently with the 8 range queen/hydra's speed on creep/35 hp banes. Likewise, bio will always underperform against stalkers 3-shoting marines while getting +2 dmg per upgrade and colossi being that good against marines, and mech not having any answer whatsoever against skytoss will prevent it from being a viable option.
Balance team probably didn't work for the holidays, but with GSL and other competitions coming up there's a dire need for swift action.
|
On January 04 2018 23:21 JackONeill wrote:
Funny thing is that the issues terran faces will only get worse.
Mainly because protosses are still figuring out playing without battery, allowing terrans to deal damage with timings, and that some zergs don't get that full hydras with few vipers counter most mech compositions.
I don't see mech compositions performing decently without a viper nerf to match the raven nerf, i don't see bio compositions working decently with the 8 range queen/hydra's speed on creep/35 hp banes. Likewise, bio will always underperform against stalkers 3-shoting marines while getting +2 dmg per upgrade and colossi being that good against marines, and mech not having any answer whatsoever against skytoss will prevent it from being a viable option.
Balance team probably didn't work for the holidays, but with GSL and other competitions coming up there's a dire need for swift action.
Na, Mech is close to OP.
Gumiho have won GSL with mech half this strong.
Mass tanks is so imba, zerg all-in or rush viper like crazy.
Lair is done, they start roach speed, and infest pit a second after, then upgrades, and get hive and viper before starting hydra den lol.
Vipers at 7.30 is the aim not to die...
The B3 gas are also rushed before the B3 is even saturated.
SH is now completly useless at high level and viper is the only tool zerg have to protect vs tanks.
Not to add all the tools Terran has, like cyclon/hellion that can kill zerg early, hellbat with only armory requirement, drop thor which so powerful.
r/allthingzerg is full of "i'm lost on ZvT vs mech, have a 30% winrate"
|
On January 05 2018 02:47 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2018 23:21 JackONeill wrote:
Funny thing is that the issues terran faces will only get worse.
Mainly because protosses are still figuring out playing without battery, allowing terrans to deal damage with timings, and that some zergs don't get that full hydras with few vipers counter most mech compositions.
I don't see mech compositions performing decently without a viper nerf to match the raven nerf, i don't see bio compositions working decently with the 8 range queen/hydra's speed on creep/35 hp banes. Likewise, bio will always underperform against stalkers 3-shoting marines while getting +2 dmg per upgrade and colossi being that good against marines, and mech not having any answer whatsoever against skytoss will prevent it from being a viable option.
Balance team probably didn't work for the holidays, but with GSL and other competitions coming up there's a dire need for swift action. Na, Mech is close to OP. Gumiho have won GSL with mech half this strong. Mass tanks is so imba, zerg all-in or rush viper like crazy. Lair is done, they start roach speed, and infest pit a second after, then upgrades, and get hive and viper before starting hydra den lol. Vipers at 7.30 is the aim not to die... The B3 gas are also rushed before the B3 is even saturated. SH is now completly useless at high level and viper is the only tool zerg have to protect vs tanks. Not to add all the tools Terran has, like cyclon/hellion that can kill zerg early, hellbat with only armory requirement, drop thor which so powerful. r/allthingzerg is full of "i'm lost on ZvT vs mech, have a 30% winrate"
That's a lot of text to convey absolutely zero factual data. Who needs David Kim when we have.... a Zerg sub-Reddit?
Side note: If you're losing to Thor drops in 2018, re-evaluate your life.
|
On January 05 2018 05:15 always_winter wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2018 02:47 Tyrhanius wrote:On January 04 2018 23:21 JackONeill wrote:
Funny thing is that the issues terran faces will only get worse.
Mainly because protosses are still figuring out playing without battery, allowing terrans to deal damage with timings, and that some zergs don't get that full hydras with few vipers counter most mech compositions.
I don't see mech compositions performing decently without a viper nerf to match the raven nerf, i don't see bio compositions working decently with the 8 range queen/hydra's speed on creep/35 hp banes. Likewise, bio will always underperform against stalkers 3-shoting marines while getting +2 dmg per upgrade and colossi being that good against marines, and mech not having any answer whatsoever against skytoss will prevent it from being a viable option.
Balance team probably didn't work for the holidays, but with GSL and other competitions coming up there's a dire need for swift action. Na, Mech is close to OP. Gumiho have won GSL with mech half this strong. Mass tanks is so imba, zerg all-in or rush viper like crazy. Lair is done, they start roach speed, and infest pit a second after, then upgrades, and get hive and viper before starting hydra den lol. Vipers at 7.30 is the aim not to die... The B3 gas are also rushed before the B3 is even saturated. SH is now completly useless at high level and viper is the only tool zerg have to protect vs tanks. Not to add all the tools Terran has, like cyclon/hellion that can kill zerg early, hellbat with only armory requirement, drop thor which so powerful. r/allthingzerg is full of "i'm lost on ZvT vs mech, have a 30% winrate" That's a lot of text to convey absolutely zero factual data. Who needs David Kim when we have.... a Zerg sub-Reddit? Side note: If you're losing to Thor drops in 2018, re-evaluate your life.
Yeah because he brings a lot of facts ?
That's just double standard, terran whine all day whithout bringing any facts but reapeating the same things, and when you don't agree you got insulted
Nobody mention dying on thor drop, just the strenght of this strat, a bit like a immortal drop who can shoot air.
|
Seems like protoss players are doing well with thier ground army and don't bother to calculate a clear way to transition into air fleet.I don't see their desperation when building air units like good'ol brood wars's time.I don't see it and this is a insult to terran's mech and mech players.Protoss does not scare max push ground mech in SC2.
Anyway i think cyclones are fine beside it's armor type.If blizzard remove it's armor tag i'm pretty confident that with this change alone, high cyclones count alongside with other factory units will easily reap through EVERY ground units protoss could offer and BAM! We have a retared version of warhound that doesn't ruin TvZ.I also think protoss players can easily hold off non-armor tag cyclones cheese with thier macro advantage and stargate opening follow up phoenixs anyway so nothing is broken in early game..
And one more thing is just simple change also does help bio in early game from being bullied by stalkers and the bully one would be terran  .
I strongly recommend blizzard should try this change then see how it turns out.
|
Cyclones without the armor tag will make them way stronger vs Stalkers, the only unit that can defend vs early cyclones in TvP. Its a huge change. Helion runbies are another new stuff that is coming to the match-up, so its not like TvP is all about early defense by the terran..
|
Cyclones are strong enough, no buff needed.
|
From what I've seen, the main issue seems to be how fast Protoss can churn out upgrades? It just makes fights look really one sided sometimes. Maybe I'm wrong though.
|
On January 11 2018 02:37 Myrddrael wrote:
From what I've seen, the main issue seems to be how fast Protoss can churn out upgrades? It just makes fights look really one sided sometimes. Maybe I'm wrong though.
The main issue is that without WM drops forcing detection, and with buffed Stalkers keeping Terran inside their base, Protoss is free to safely drop a fast third + double forge. By the time Terran can push, Stalker/Zealot/Immortal on superior upgrades and (eventually) storm is just waiting to eat them alive.
Details: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-strategy/529995-pbotw-pvt-dns-blink-pressure-into-2x-forge
Imo the buffed Stalker is fine by itself, the real problem is that Terran lacks any reliable options to stop Protoss from getting a superior eco + superior upgrades. Early bio pushes are slaughtered by Stalker kiting, WM drops kill some probes at most, same for Lib harass, and Banshees are shut down by Shield Batteries. A handful of Stalkers is always the right answer for Protoss, and thus the aforementioned build is proof against basically anything Terran does except crazy cheese, which is obviously not reliable.
I've watched Stats and Zest use some variations of this build on stream, but the core concept is third + double forge while soft-containing Terran with blink stalkers. And it is strong as fuck.
|
On January 10 2018 20:16 seemsgood wrote:Seems like protoss players are doing well with thier ground army and don't bother to calculate a clear way to transition into air fleet.I don't see their desperation when building air units like good'ol brood wars's time.I don't see it and this is a insult to terran's mech and mech players.Protoss does not scare max push ground mech in SC2. Anyway i think cyclones are fine beside it's armor type.If blizzard remove it's armor tag i'm pretty confident that with this change alone, high cyclones count alongside with other factory units will easily reap through EVERY ground units protoss could offer and BAM! We have a retared version of warhound that doesn't ruin TvZ.I also think protoss players can easily hold off non-armor tag cyclones cheese with thier macro advantage and stargate opening follow up phoenixs anyway so nothing is broken in early game.. And one more thing is just simple change also does help bio in early game from being bullied by stalkers and the bully one would be terran . I strongly recommend blizzard should try this change then see how it turns out.
honestly speaking, that would be a terrible change.
the Cyclone would just destroy every ground comp Protoss can make, even a pure immortal army would get destroyed.
TvT would be Cyclone vs Cyclone every game from start to end, both players would be unable to transition out of this BS because Tanks wouldn't do shit.
|
The Raven still needs to be reworked. Anti-armor missile splashes onto friendly units. Repair drone does the work of approximately 2.25 scv's, which is nice, but not worth the 100M/200G investment not to mention the requirement of a Starport with a tech lab. The cost of healing a Siege Tank (by SCV's) up from 1HP to 175 is 37.5 minerals and 31.25 gas.
I would like to see the widow mine cost, damage, and supply cut in half and the production doubled to make minefields more viable. Lowering the build time has done very little to change the fact that this is another unit, like the reaper or cyclone, that you build 1 or 2 of for early defense and then serves no purpose otherwise. The vulnerability of the mine and the fact that it does friendly fire damage all the time means the best way to defend a vulnerable mine is with other mines. (Mines don't friendly fire other mines.)
Here's my math on the repair drone with the example of a Siege Tank:
Comparison: A Siege Tank
HP: 175
Build time: 32 seconds
Mineral Cost: 150
Gas Cost: 125
Repair drone heals at a rate of around 12.6 mechanical unit life per second and lasts for 90 seconds.
An SCV heals at the same rate a unit builds. A Siege Tank takes 32 seconds to build.
Repairing a unit from zero health to full takes 25% of its unit cost.
Repair drone can completely heal a Siege Tank up from 1HP to 175HP in 13.8 seconds
An SCV can heal a siege tank from 1HP to 175HP in 31.8 seconds
I would suggest that in the future either the Raven's cost should come down, it should be reactorable from the Starport or moved to the Factory, or that some of its more useful previous abilities be returned such as PDD. Right now the unit does not have an ability that shines. Compare it to the Viper and you'll see what I mean. Each of the Viper's abilities is incredibly useful in certain circumstances. The Raven has similar cost, more of a commitment as far as production goes (it ties up a Starport with a tech lab), and still no abilities that warrant making one. The Viper's parasitic bomb does 120 damage, splash, and no friendly fire. This is before we even get to abduct, Blinding Cloud, and Consume, which is a bonus 4th ability that the Viper has. I'm still struggling to understand what class Blizzard wants the Raven to fit into.
|
What needs to happen for the game to be fun to play:
Zerglings need to have HP reduced by 5.
Banelings need to have zero bonus HP from centrifugal hooks.
Un-upgraded overlord speed needs to be brought back to reasonable levels.
Tank needs to cost 125 minerals instead of 135.
Get rid of the raven and give terran a vision unit for 50/50 with no attack.
Get rid of cyclone and replace with 3 modes of tank transportation: light (anti-air), normal (normal), seiged (seiged). The idea here is that you can't simply convert between seiged and light you have to toggle through the stages. Function of light mode should match Goliath.
Return the original HOTS mine.
Protoss needs MSC with strong photon overcharge on Nexus Only. Except energy comes from the Nexus, and is auto-cast if the MSC is over the nexus. MSC is the 1 place to which your army can return with teleport.
Storm should be shaped in doughnut not circle. Everybody knows eye of storm is calm. Would make for more sophisticated cast also.
Change stalker tag to anti-light, adept tag to anti-armoured.
Infestor, Ghost, High Templar. All should have 200 energy max and have fungal, emp, storm cost 100.
|
Oh, i forgot to mention.
Would prefer replacing ghost snipe with seeker missile and no cancel ability.
|
We need more design discussions and less balance ones, really.
Let's discuss mass adepts, mass marines, banelings, chargelots, thorVSgoliath, widow mines, mass roach ZvZ, free units.pathing skill, splash skill, split skill.... We need to address the volatility of the game, so that we can say the best player wins more times.
|
It's been a month and blizzard still has not fixed the green unit selection box, or lack there of. Their support is abysmal.
|
@bulya i highly doubt it.
On January 11 2018 03:25 MrWayne wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2018 20:16 seemsgood wrote:Seems like protoss players are doing well with thier ground army and don't bother to calculate a clear way to transition into air fleet.I don't see their desperation when building air units like good'ol brood wars's time.I don't see it and this is a insult to terran's mech and mech players.Protoss does not scare max push ground mech in SC2. Anyway i think cyclones are fine beside it's armor type.If blizzard remove it's armor tag i'm pretty confident that with this change alone, high cyclones count alongside with other factory units will easily reap through EVERY ground units protoss could offer and BAM! We have a retared version of warhound that doesn't ruin TvZ.I also think protoss players can easily hold off non-armor tag cyclones cheese with thier macro advantage and stargate opening follow up phoenixs anyway so nothing is broken in early game.. And one more thing is just simple change also does help bio in early game from being bullied by stalkers and the bully one would be terran . I strongly recommend blizzard should try this change then see how it turns out. honestly speaking, that would be a terrible change. the Cyclone would just destroy every ground comp Protoss can make, even a pure immortal army would get destroyed. TvT would be Cyclone vs Cyclone every game from start to end, both players would be unable to transition out of this BS because Tanks wouldn't do shit.
Yes my point is making them become OP first. Because the goal here is buff ground mech to the point it could trash every ground army of protoss when in position. If non-armor tag cyclones a move against everything without supports then we can nerf it hp about 20-30 point but keeping it from being melted by immortals is a must.
My only problem with protoss right now is thier ground army punch through terran'front line army way too fast. Tanks can't fire enough rounds to make a cost efficiency fight... Not considering protoss in sc2 can warp in chargelots in the middle of the battlefield.
|
On January 11 2018 13:17 ReachTheSky wrote:
It's been a month and blizzard still has not fixed the green unit selection box, or lack there of. Their support is abysmal.
I understand them dodging the player-base about multiplayer balance, but bug fixing should be a priority. It seems they don't really care anymore.
|
Hopefully we'll get a Community Update today, it's been a long time since we've got one and there are still some changes most of us would like to see.
|
My question is: when the hell are they going to buff roaches? of all the units in starcraft that need help, its the roach. Seriously, in zvp/zvt, outside of allins, whats the purpose of making a roach other then making a ravager(which is mostly used for allins too) shouldn't roach be a part of the "core" army like hydra and banelings? They have by far the worse scaling in the game, they're easy as pie to defend even when you dont know their coming and their dps is terrible compared to the things their supposed to counter.
And when you think about it, what does the roach even beat? adepts hellions zealots and marines right? marines will outscale roaches eventually with stim and shield even without medivacs. Adepts and hellions can just choose to run around them and kill drones. Zealots will beat roaches unless the roaches are kiting. Seems unfair that a unit that has so many hard counters has nothing that it hard counters.
I love how the zvp meta exemplifies this; if you can force your opponent to make a roach warren, you're ahead because roaches are such a terrible investment. Lol.
|
On January 13 2018 02:12 Woosixion wrote:
My question is: when the hell are they going to buff roaches? of all the units in starcraft that need help, its the roach. Seriously, in zvp/zvt, outside of allins, whats the purpose of making a roach other then making a ravager(which is mostly used for allins too) shouldn't roach be a part of the "core" army like hydra and banelings? They have by far the worse scaling in the game, they're easy as pie to defend even when you dont know their coming and their dps is terrible compared to the things their supposed to counter.
And when you think about it, what does the roach even beat? adepts hellions zealots and marines right? marines will outscale roaches eventually with stim and shield even without medivacs. Adepts and hellions can just choose to run around them and kill drones. Zealots will beat roaches unless the roaches are kiting. Seems unfair that a unit that has so many hard counters has nothing that it hard counters.
I love how the zvp meta exemplifies this; if you can force your opponent to make a roach warren, you're ahead because roaches are such a terrible investment. Lol.
We saw a lot of roaches at gsl (most of zvz and a lot o zvp). The question is linga bane hydra is just too good and no one makes roaches.
|
On January 13 2018 02:12 Woosixion wrote:
My question is: when the hell are they going to buff roaches? of all the units in starcraft that need help, its the roach. Seriously, in zvp/zvt, outside of allins, whats the purpose of making a roach other then making a ravager(which is mostly used for allins too) shouldn't roach be a part of the "core" army like hydra and banelings? They have by far the worse scaling in the game, they're easy as pie to defend even when you dont know their coming and their dps is terrible compared to the things their supposed to counter.
And when you think about it, what does the roach even beat? adepts hellions zealots and marines right? marines will outscale roaches eventually with stim and shield even without medivacs. Adepts and hellions can just choose to run around them and kill drones. Zealots will beat roaches unless the roaches are kiting. Seems unfair that a unit that has so many hard counters has nothing that it hard counters.
I love how the zvp meta exemplifies this; if you can force your opponent to make a roach warren, you're ahead because roaches are such a terrible investment. Lol. Roaches used to be perfectly strong, but since then everything else has been buffed. We need far more nerfing and less buffing. When everything is OP the game gets too snowbally.
|
On January 13 2018 01:25 Tao367 wrote:
Hopefully we'll get a Community Update today, it's been a long time since we've got one and there are still some changes most of us would like to see.
Ask and ye shall receive
https://us.battle.net/forums/en/sc2/topic/20760956093
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
![[image loading]](https://imgur.com/a/8FMiG)
