|
Hey everyone, thanks for the discussions regarding the proposed changes. We hear your feedback and want to make the following changes for the next balance update.
As we mentioned in our last community update, the Auto Turret will be back on the Raven replacing the Repair Drone ability. However, we received feedback that Auto Turret harass was a bit difficult to interact with due to the Raven’s ability to deploy turrets and promptly leave. Thus, we have decided to lower the Auto Turret’s cast range from 3 to 1, making the Raven user commit more in order to pull off worker harassment. With this change, the effective range of the Auto Turret becomes 7 (1 Cast Range + 6 Attack Range), meaning that well-placed Queens (8 Range) and static defenses (7 Range) will be more threatening to harassing Ravens.
Next, the Disruptor’s Purification Nova ability was becoming difficult to use with its initial charge-up time before launch. We are making a change to the Purification Nova ability and it will no longer need to charge up before firing. Instead, this charge-up time will only exist if the Disruptor drops from a transport, increasing the reaction time for players fighting against Disruptor drops.
Also, we were alerted by a community post this week that High Templars are currently able to cast Feedback on Shield Batteries. In order to make the Feedback ability more consistent with other structures with energy, players will no longer be able to cast Feedback on Shield Batteries.
Lastly, there are several events and tournaments coming up so we want to try and give players as much time to practice as possible. Therefore, we will make the balance changes available for testing in the “Balance Test Mod” extension mod on January 23rd, along with the start of 2018 Season 1 Ladder. For next seasons 1v1 map pool, it will be:
- Abiogenesis LE (+ Show Spoiler +)
- Backwater LE(+ Show Spoiler +)
- Acid Plant LE(+ Show Spoiler +)
- Eastwatch LE(+ Show Spoiler +)
- Blackpink LE
- Neon Violet Square LE
- Catalyst LE
As always, please feel free to let us know what you think on the forums or any other community sites.
(Durations below are stated in faster game speed.)
Terran 
Raven
- Interference Matrix duration increased from 5.7 to 7.9.
- Affected units will now display a status bar to show the duration of the ability.
- Repair Drone ability removed.
- Auto Turret ability added.
- Auto Turret cast range reduced from 3 to 1.
- Hi-Sec Auto Tracking increases the range of Auto-Turrets by +1 again.
- Anti-Armor Missile
- Anti-Armor Missile will no longer have a delay and will fly immediately towards the target.
- Splash radius increased from 2.4 to 2.88.
- Splash damage changed:
- 100% damage radius increased from 0.72 to 1.2.
- 50% damage radius increased from 1.44 to 1.8.
- 25% damage radius increased from 2.88 to 3.
- Energy cost reduced from 100 to 75.
- Enhanced Munitions upgrade removed.
Ghost
- Starting energy increased from 50 to 75.
- No longer starts with the Personal Cloaking upgrade.
Ghost Academy
- Removed upgrade Moebius Reactor.
- Added Personal Cloaking upgrade
- 150 Minerals / 150 Gas / 85.7 Research time
Protoss 
Nexus + Mothership
- Mass Recall and Strategic Recall warp-in times increased from 0 seconds to 0.7 second.
Stalker
- Particle Disruptors damage reduced from 15 (21 vs armored) to 13 (18 vs armored) and period reduced from 1.54 to 1.34.
- Protoss Ground Weapons upgrade will provide +1 base damage and +1 armored instead of +2 base damage.
Disruptor
- Purification Nova initial pause duration reduced from 1 to 0.
- When Disruptors drop from transports, if Purification Nova is not on cooldown, then there will be a 0.7 second pause before being able to use Purification Nova.
- Range indicators will be displayed for Purification Nova when the Disruptor is selected.
Shield Battery
- Now has a 'Stop' command on its command card.
Adept
- Adepts will continue with their last issued command instead of stopping after using Psionic Transfer.
Zerg 
Hydralisk
- Split Muscular Augments upgrade into two separate upgrades:
- Muscular Augments
- Upgrade cost is 100 Minerals / 100 Vespene Gas / 71.4 Research time
- Grooved Spines
- Upgrade cost is 100 Minerals / 100 Vespene Gas / 71.4 Research time
Viper
- Bug fix: Parasitic Bomb initial pause duration increased from 0 to 0.7 seconds.
|
Hydra nerf will make Protoss invincible in this matchup. Pretty safe against any Zerg midgame agression. Not a good change i think.
|
That Disruptor change seems... not particularly elegant. It's not the kind of thing that a player will see and go "oh, that makes perfect sense".
|
RIP Abyssal Reef and maybe Protoss
|
Zerg masses one unit for 7 months: Nerf it to the ground.
Terran masses one unit for 7 years: That's okay, they're the highest skilled race.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On January 23 2018 07:49 ZigguratOfUr wrote:
Shield Battery
- Now has a 'Stop' command on its command card.
this makes a lot of sense I have a few times where I needed to target a gateway with a battery to heal it vs zerglings but expended the whole energy of the battery even though the zerglings backed off. You cant stop healing a target once you start unless there is another valid target to re target to.
I'm not sure how I feel about the adept change protoss unit control is often fairly simple so removing actions that protoss players need to control units does not seem like such a great idea, It just lowers the skill ceiling. Also now all protoss players are going to have to relearn how to control adepts with the new mechanic and untrain their brains from how it used to work.
|
United States33313 Posts
I have no opinion on the actual changes, but I do appreciate the frequent communication from Blizzard.
|
On January 23 2018 08:05 NewSunshine wrote:
That Disruptor change seems... not particularly elegant. It's not the kind of thing that a player will see and go "oh, that makes perfect sense".
its not eligant but it solves the problem, frankly im ok with fixes like this if they cant find another decent way of fixing problems, the disrupter drop was broken, but adding a delay on disruptors in armies just felt clunky and bad. this lets them work well in armies without being able to consta trade with terran bio for free while terran has no time to react. From a gameplay standpoint its the best of both worlds.
|
nice change to the Raven's Autoturret. Anything to weaken the # of air-to-ground attack options Terran has is a good thing.
|
On January 23 2018 08:07 Solar424 wrote:
Zerg masses one unit for 7 months: Nerf it to the ground.
Terran masses one unit for 7 years: That's okay, they're the highest skilled race.
bio has been nerfed in the past what are you talking about?
-stim nerf
-maurader attack nerf
-bunker build time nerf
-widowmine nerf
its also been indireclty nerfed repeatedly through buffs to the other races. I dont think this nerf kills hydra bane but it does make the timing that zerg can get out speed hydras more reasonable and creates more moments of vulnerability in the mid game where terran and protoss have some breathing room. its a good change.
|
Abyssal is gone. Whory shiiiiit
|
On January 23 2018 08:16 Cricketer12 wrote:
Abyssal is gone. Whory shiiiiit
I will miss it in my opinion its the best map we have had in LOTV. still all maps need to be retired at some point or the game gets stale, we learned that from the dream pool.
|
What's with these interference matrix times?
5.7 -> 7.9 in Blizzard time is 8 -> 11 in real time, and I'm pretty sure interference matrix currently takes 6 seconds, and the plan was to increase it to 10 seconds.
Also the anti-armor missile radii are inconsistent.
|
Sad to se Abyssal go. I guess people are sick of it now. It really is the best map we've had in LoTV
|
Pretty big Raven changes in a way that looks like it's going to just make them all around better, which is required.
I think the Hydra change is pretty severe but Protoss is suffering pretty badly in the match up at the moment, so obviously some type of nerf was on the table.
Protoss changes all seem decent except for the Purifier which should just be flat out removed from the game. The changes are super inelegant and really reflect the balance teams lack of a clue on how to make the unit good.
Here's an idea..
Put the Reaver...in the game...
Problem solved, Protoss players already have a clue on how the unit works and the unit was able to be balanced in BW relatively well, no reason it shouldn't be implemented to replace the garbage unit that is the Purifier.
|
On January 23 2018 08:27 jpg06051992 wrote:
Pretty big Raven changes in a way that looks like it's going to just make them all around better, which is required.
I think the Hydra change is pretty severe but Protoss is suffering pretty badly in the match up at the moment, so obviously some type of nerf was on the table.
Protoss changes all seem decent except for the Purifier which should just be flat out removed from the game. The changes are super inelegant and really reflect the balance teams lack of a clue on how to make the unit good.
Here's an idea..
Put the Reaver...in the game...
Problem solved, Protoss players already have a clue on how the unit works and the unit was able to be balanced in BW relatively well, no reason it shouldn't be implemented to replace the garbage unit that is the Purifier.
Reavers with non-retarded scarab AI sounds pretty broken.
|
United States33313 Posts
Don't forget that BW reavers were given a hard delay after dropping from shuttles specifically because reaver drops were too strong 
|
On January 23 2018 08:05 NewSunshine wrote:
That Disruptor change seems... not particularly elegant. It's not the kind of thing that a player will see and go "oh, that makes perfect sense".
Ghosts with 75 energy is not very elegant either 
|
1 cast range? lol thats useless.
|
Even with the buffs, I just don't see the Raven making a comeback tbh. 100/200 and techlab time on the starport is just too much of an investment for the utility it provides. The starport is basically the Terran robo–always overtaxed, and the opportunity cost of using it for a Raven just isn't worth it.
Even in TvT, the mass Cyclone meta means a Raven disables one Cyclone before getting shot down by the rest. The Raven needs buffs, yes, but the real issue is with the starport moreso than the Raven itself.
|
On January 23 2018 09:23 pvsnp wrote:
Even with the buffs, I just don't see the Raven making a comeback tbh. 100/200 and techlab time on the starport is just too much of an investment for the utility it provides. The starport is basically the Terran robo–always overtaxed, and the opportunity cost of using it for a Raven just isn't worth it.
Even in TvT, the mass Cyclone meta means a Raven disables one Cyclone before getting shot down by the rest. The Raven needs buffs, yes, but the real issue is with the starport moreso than the Raven itself.
I agree completely. The Tech Lab/Reactor System works well on the Barracks, ok on the factory, but terrible on the Starport. The Raven will not be worth the money, and when you figure in the opportunity cost, it just doesn't make sense.
We'll give it a shot, but even nerfing the turret range is ridiculous for a unit that is this expensive. Imagine if the Viper had its abduct or blinding cloud cast range reduced to 1.
|
I`m so happy for stalker nerf.
|
On January 23 2018 10:03 Ransomstarcraft wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 09:23 pvsnp wrote:
Even with the buffs, I just don't see the Raven making a comeback tbh. 100/200 and techlab time on the starport is just too much of an investment for the utility it provides. The starport is basically the Terran robo–always overtaxed, and the opportunity cost of using it for a Raven just isn't worth it.
Even in TvT, the mass Cyclone meta means a Raven disables one Cyclone before getting shot down by the rest. The Raven needs buffs, yes, but the real issue is with the starport moreso than the Raven itself. I agree completely. The Tech Lab/Reactor System works well on the Barracks, ok on the factory, but terrible on the Starport. The Raven will not be worth the money, and when you figure in the opportunity cost, it just doesn't make sense. We'll give it a shot, but even nerfing the turret range is ridiculous for a unit that is this expensive. Imagine if the Viper had its abduct or blinding cloud cast range reduced to 1.
i hope Ravens still aren't good, then i can still open cloak banshee every tvt
|
Cant wait for 1 cast range infested terrans or 1 cast range forcefields too! This will make the game so much more exciting!
|
I just noticed how much easier they've made protoss since 4.0. Observer locking, HT auto attack, adepts continuting their commands after shade, stop function on batteries. Not saying these things are broken, but I don't think toss is the race that is most mechanically demanding right now
|
On January 23 2018 11:39 Fango wrote:
I just noticed how much easier they've made protoss since 4.0. Observer locking, HT auto attack, adepts continuting their commands after shade, stop function on batteries. Not saying these things are broken, but I don't think toss is the race that is most mechanically demanding right now
Stop function on shield batteries and adept commands not being cancelled is just correcting inconsistencies. The other stuff, observer, HT, disruptor ease-of-use changes do feel rather unnecessary.
|
On January 23 2018 11:34 Loccstana wrote:
Cant wait for 1 cast range infested terrans or 1 cast range forcefields too! This will make the game so much more exciting!
don't worry, it will hardly make a difference as even now infestors barely see usage... i wonder why :D
|
What exactly is the reason for the stalker nerf? Protoss stalkers feel like a non crappy unit for the first time?
Is the ladder being flooded by stalker allins or something?
I don't see any problems in the pro games.
|
On January 23 2018 11:48 Freeborn wrote:
What exactly is the reason for the stalker nerf? Protoss stalkers feel like a non crappy unit for the first time?
Is the ladder being flooded by stalker allins or something?
I don't see any problems in the pro games.
You should watch more pro games. Stalkers are significantly too strong in PvT.
|
On January 23 2018 11:48 Freeborn wrote:
What exactly is the reason for the stalker nerf? Protoss stalkers feel like a non crappy unit for the first time?
Is the ladder being flooded by stalker allins or something?
I don't see any problems in the pro games.
You need to watch more pro games. Classic and Stats have lost exactly one PvT series since 4.0
|
On January 23 2018 11:42 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 11:39 Fango wrote:
I just noticed how much easier they've made protoss since 4.0. Observer locking, HT auto attack, adepts continuting their commands after shade, stop function on batteries. Not saying these things are broken, but I don't think toss is the race that is most mechanically demanding right now Stop function on shield batteries and adept commands not being cancelled is just correcting inconsistencies. The other stuff, observer, HT, disruptor ease-of-use changes do feel rather unnecessary.
They still further reduce the mechanical demand of the already least demanding race. Not sure why that's at all necessary
|
Auto-turrets are already frustrating to put down during fights because your own or the enemy's units block the turrets by accident. Decreasing to only 1 range will make that even more difficult. I get that they were too strong as worker harass, but this just makes an already clunky unit even more frustrating to use.
|
I'm concerned about the hydra nerf, this makes PvZ seem even more scary and gives Protoss an enormous incentive to build Oracles almost every game. Everything else I feel either neutral on or agree with. Honestly I liked the Auto Turret ability and I'm glad its returning, it just needs to be redesigned a bit, and a casting range nerf may be enough.
|
On January 23 2018 11:54 Fango wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 11:42 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On January 23 2018 11:39 Fango wrote:
I just noticed how much easier they've made protoss since 4.0. Observer locking, HT auto attack, adepts continuting their commands after shade, stop function on batteries. Not saying these things are broken, but I don't think toss is the race that is most mechanically demanding right now Stop function on shield batteries and adept commands not being cancelled is just correcting inconsistencies. The other stuff, observer, HT, disruptor ease-of-use changes do feel rather unnecessary. They still further reduce the mechanical demand of the already least demanding race. Not sure why that's at all necessary
Because it's ugly design to have stuff like shield batteries draining their entire charge healing a gateway.
|
On January 23 2018 08:35 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 08:27 jpg06051992 wrote:
Pretty big Raven changes in a way that looks like it's going to just make them all around better, which is required.
I think the Hydra change is pretty severe but Protoss is suffering pretty badly in the match up at the moment, so obviously some type of nerf was on the table.
Protoss changes all seem decent except for the Purifier which should just be flat out removed from the game. The changes are super inelegant and really reflect the balance teams lack of a clue on how to make the unit good.
Here's an idea..
Put the Reaver...in the game...
Problem solved, Protoss players already have a clue on how the unit works and the unit was able to be balanced in BW relatively well, no reason it shouldn't be implemented to replace the garbage unit that is the Purifier. Reavers with non-retarded scarab AI sounds pretty broken.
Just give it its usual range BUT make the scarabs explode quick.
|
Errrh...they need to watch closely into anti missle radius buff.
|
Looks like the tournaments are still forced to use the new map pool...
|
On January 23 2018 12:46 geokilla wrote:
Looks like the tournaments are still forced to use the new map pool...
Backtracking at this point would be absolutely insane. All the pros have been practicing customs on the new maps ever since it was announced.
|
I'm hyped about the new maps but I wish Ascension to Aiur would stay and Blackpink would be removed. Don't really like that map.
|
Why do you want reaver in the game when you have colossus? Don't they both have the same function?
|
On January 23 2018 11:48 Freeborn wrote:
What exactly is the reason for the stalker nerf? Protoss stalkers feel like a non crappy unit for the first time?
Is the ladder being flooded by stalker allins or something?
I don't see any problems in the pro games.
you must be blind
|
On January 23 2018 08:12 washikie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 08:05 NewSunshine wrote:
That Disruptor change seems... not particularly elegant. It's not the kind of thing that a player will see and go "oh, that makes perfect sense". its not eligant but it solves the problem, frankly im ok with fixes like this if they cant find another decent way of fixing problems, the disrupter drop was broken, but adding a delay on disruptors in armies just felt clunky and bad. this lets them work well in armies without being able to consta trade with terran bio for free while terran has no time to react. From a gameplay standpoint its the best of both worlds.
The Disruptor change (attack delay when dropped from a transport) is exactly the same approach Blizzard implemented on Reavers in Brood War to balance Reaver harassment, which had the exact same problem as Disruptor drops. I'm not defending it as not clunky and unintuitive, because it is both of those, but at least it's been proven to be a fairly effective at solving the problem.
|
On January 23 2018 08:15 washikie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 08:07 Solar424 wrote:
Zerg masses one unit for 7 months: Nerf it to the ground.
Terran masses one unit for 7 years: That's okay, they're the highest skilled race. bio has been nerfed in the past what are you talking about? -stim nerf -maurader attack nerf -bunker build time nerf -widowmine nerf its also been indireclty nerfed repeatedly through buffs to the other races. I dont think this nerf kills hydra bane but it does make the timing that zerg can get out speed hydras more reasonable and creates more moments of vulnerability in the mid game where terran and protoss have some breathing room. its a good change.
And where's the breathing room for Zerg? Concidering that they buff or add more and more harras options for T and P in all those years. Especially now when the auto turret is back?
|
On January 23 2018 08:27 jpg06051992 wrote:
Protoss changes all seem decent except for the Purifier which should just be flat out removed from the game. The changes are super inelegant and really reflect the balance teams lack of a clue on how to make the unit good.
Here's an idea..
Put the Reaver...in the game...
Problem solved, Protoss players already have a clue on how the unit works and the unit was able to be balanced in BW relatively well, no reason it shouldn't be implemented to replace the garbage unit that is the Purifier.
There is a very small difference between reaver and disruptor.
1. Disruptor require micro for every shot, the reaver auto attacks
2. Reaver auto targets according to aggro (usually the closest enemy). Disruptor needs to be targetted but deals damage on impact (usually the closest enemy).
3. Disruptor shots are on a cool down. Reaver shots has a cooldown and a need to have enough scarabs, which cost minerals and take time to build.
Other than that, they are basically the same unit. A ground to ground explosion shooter.
In my opinion the reaver looks to be better at winning games. That is bad. Reaver would need to be tweaked exactly like the disruptor has been several times.
|
I'm gonna say that this is the wrong direction to take the Raven... I don't see Terran needing more harass options, I don't see them needing more offensive options although I would like to see either proactive and aggressive mech armies have a support unit outside of Medivacs or see defensive/sieging mech armies have a support unit. Auto Turret seems like the wrong choice, and without the nerf would have upset a huge number of players. The numbers on the other abilities seem off to me too. I guess I just don't "get it". Why push it in this direction?
Not that keen on the Hydra change either, though I like the Disruptor, Stalker and Shield Battery changes. Ghost idk about. I can see Adepts being mega wonky for a little while, interested to hear how that goes for players.
|
On January 23 2018 15:48 Drfilip wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 08:27 jpg06051992 wrote:
Protoss changes all seem decent except for the Purifier which should just be flat out removed from the game. The changes are super inelegant and really reflect the balance teams lack of a clue on how to make the unit good.
Here's an idea..
Put the Reaver...in the game...
Problem solved, Protoss players already have a clue on how the unit works and the unit was able to be balanced in BW relatively well, no reason it shouldn't be implemented to replace the garbage unit that is the Purifier. There is a very small difference between reaver and disruptor. 1. Disruptor require micro for every shot, the reaver auto attacks 2. Reaver auto targets according to aggro (usually the closest enemy). Disruptor needs to be targetted but deals damage on impact (usually the closest enemy). 3. Disruptor shots are on a cool down. Reaver shots has a cooldown and a need to have enough scarabs, which cost minerals and take time to build. Other than that, they are basically the same unit. A ground to ground explosion shooter. In my opinion the reaver looks to be better at winning games. That is bad. Reaver would need to be tweaked exactly like the disruptor has been several times.
4. The Disruptor looks much more cool and sleek than the Reaver.
|
On January 23 2018 07:58 hiroshOne wrote:
Hydra nerf will make Protoss invincible in this matchup. Pretty safe against any Zerg midgame agression. Not a good change i think.
The MU is an all-in from Zerg to avoid late game, and they decide to nerf zerg mid game without touching protoss late game.
Like they did when they "rework SH".
Also considering how zerg are doing poorly vs T, it's also a mech buff.
It feels like blizzard doesn't want to see Zerg winning something this year.
|
On January 23 2018 16:24 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 07:58 hiroshOne wrote:
Hydra nerf will make Protoss invincible in this matchup. Pretty safe against any Zerg midgame agression. Not a good change i think. The MU is an all-in from Zerg to avoid late game, and they decide to nerf zerg mid game without touching protoss late game. Like they did when they "rework SH". Also considering how zerg are doing poorly vs T, it's also a mech buff. It feels like blizzard doesn't want to see Zerg winning something this year.
Exactly this. Especially that for all those years they limited Zerg midgame comps. Muta/bling is obsolete, especially thanks to single Thor wrecking mutas.They nerfed Infestors, they nerfed Ravagers. Hydra/bling was the only valid composition, giving Zerg some room to swith into Hive tech, by letting Zerg to be agressive. Now it's purely defensive in TvZ, as timing is so freaking nerfed. GG Zerg in both matchups. Protoss will safely camp into mass carriers withoit even bothering of getting defences. Terran will do whatever they want on the map. Slowly killing u with harras and drops. And even camping to Hive tech has no point, as Ultras are not as strong as they used to be. Broodlords too, especially with no support from Infestors.
I'm wandering, what the fuck they are thinking about, nerfing Zerg so hard and not even bothering to think about Protoss Air nerf. Carriers are so ridiculous...
|
On January 23 2018 16:44 hiroshOne wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 16:24 Tyrhanius wrote:On January 23 2018 07:58 hiroshOne wrote:
Hydra nerf will make Protoss invincible in this matchup. Pretty safe against any Zerg midgame agression. Not a good change i think. The MU is an all-in from Zerg to avoid late game, and they decide to nerf zerg mid game without touching protoss late game. Like they did when they "rework SH". Also considering how zerg are doing poorly vs T, it's also a mech buff. It feels like blizzard doesn't want to see Zerg winning something this year. Exactly this. Especially that for all those years they limited Zerg midgame comps. Muta/bling is obsolete, especially thanks to single Thor wrecking mutas.They nerfed Infestors, they nerfed Ravagers. Hydra/bling was the only valid composition, giving Zerg some room to swith into Hive tech, by letting Zerg to be agressive. Now it's purely defensive in TvZ, as timing is so freaking nerfed. GG Zerg in both matchups. Protoss will safely camp into mass carriers withoit even bothering of getting defences. Terran will do whatever they want on the map. Slowly killing u with harras and drops. And even camping to Hive tech has no point, as Ultras are not as strong as they used to be. Broodlords too, especially with no support from Infestors. I'm wandering, what the fuck they are thinking about, nerfing Zerg so hard and not even bothering to think about Protoss Air nerf. Carriers are so ridiculous...
I think you've misunderstood zerg. A single thor doesn't wreck mutas if you actually micro your mutas. By the time Protoss is on carriers, you should be on 8 bases and simply have more than the protoss. On equal supply and money, zerg isn't supposed to win neither to terran nor protoss. If you defend their harass well and macro as you should, you should win by nutrition. If you see a pro zerg die to a terran or a protoss, it is likely the terran or the protoss did something earlier in the game to cause them to die later on in the game. That's how zerg works...
|
I agree with all the changes.
Also, that you have players from every race complaining about the patch is a good indication that Blizzard is on the right track.
|
As terran player I am should be very happy with this changes, as stalker change(I don't see that as nerf), may again make tvp playable, as at the moment I stooped playing ladder, as every tvp is either defending all in from protoss(and they have so many variants), or I am all in, with 5 rax.
BUT i don't know why nobody speaks about Anti-Armor Missile change as it will completely break the game, this is opp ability. you get two instant missile with third coming very shortly. so i.e. 6 ravens x 2 missile = 12 x 30 damage, 360 splash damage instantly, with almost no way to split, so hydra will simply be rekt in seconds, after that marines, or helbats will finish what is left, same with BRL. you simply can't split them that means that they will receive all damage. At my level of skill (3700-3800) that will be hard to exсute. but top terran playes, should dominate mid game. It may have big impact on tvt, as marines will also die in seconds. Not sure for tvp, as protoss has HT, which easily can deal with ravens.
|
On January 23 2018 17:08 MockHamill wrote:
I agree with all the changes.
Also, that you have players from every race complaining about the patch is a good indication that Blizzard is on the right track.
A good compromise is when everyone is unhappy!
Right now we've got complaints from Terran whiners, Protoss whiners, and Zerg whiners, so that means Blizzard is doing a pretty good job.
|
On January 23 2018 17:29 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 17:08 MockHamill wrote:
I agree with all the changes.
Also, that you have players from every race complaining about the patch is a good indication that Blizzard is on the right track. A good compromise is when everyone is unhappy! Right now we've got complaints from Terran whiners, Protoss whiners, and Zerg whiners, so that means Blizzard is doing a pretty good job.
Or it could mean that the community is really really whiny and would whine at anything.
It's probably both.
|
On January 23 2018 17:34 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 17:29 pvsnp wrote:On January 23 2018 17:08 MockHamill wrote:
I agree with all the changes.
Also, that you have players from every race complaining about the patch is a good indication that Blizzard is on the right track. A good compromise is when everyone is unhappy! Right now we've got complaints from Terran whiners, Protoss whiners, and Zerg whiners, so that means Blizzard is doing a pretty good job. Or it could mean that the community is really really whiny and would whine at anything. It's probably both.
I mean, my post was pretty tongue-in-cheek.
While I do think these changes are mostly solid, this community whines about everything. Even if the game was in an absolutely perfect state of balance salty people would still make up shit to whine about.
Of course, that's just human nature.
|
On January 23 2018 17:01 sd_andeh wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 16:44 hiroshOne wrote:On January 23 2018 16:24 Tyrhanius wrote:On January 23 2018 07:58 hiroshOne wrote:
Hydra nerf will make Protoss invincible in this matchup. Pretty safe against any Zerg midgame agression. Not a good change i think. The MU is an all-in from Zerg to avoid late game, and they decide to nerf zerg mid game without touching protoss late game. Like they did when they "rework SH". Also considering how zerg are doing poorly vs T, it's also a mech buff. It feels like blizzard doesn't want to see Zerg winning something this year. Exactly this. Especially that for all those years they limited Zerg midgame comps. Muta/bling is obsolete, especially thanks to single Thor wrecking mutas.They nerfed Infestors, they nerfed Ravagers. Hydra/bling was the only valid composition, giving Zerg some room to swith into Hive tech, by letting Zerg to be agressive. Now it's purely defensive in TvZ, as timing is so freaking nerfed. GG Zerg in both matchups. Protoss will safely camp into mass carriers withoit even bothering of getting defences. Terran will do whatever they want on the map. Slowly killing u with harras and drops. And even camping to Hive tech has no point, as Ultras are not as strong as they used to be. Broodlords too, especially with no support from Infestors. I'm wandering, what the fuck they are thinking about, nerfing Zerg so hard and not even bothering to think about Protoss Air nerf. Carriers are so ridiculous... I think you've misunderstood zerg. A single thor doesn't wreck mutas if you actually micro your mutas. By the time Protoss is on carriers, you should be on 8 bases and simply have more than the protoss. On equal supply and money, zerg isn't supposed to win neither to terran nor protoss. If you defend their harass well and macro as you should, you should win by nutrition. If you see a pro zerg die to a terran or a protoss, it is likely the terran or the protoss did something earlier in the game to cause them to die later on in the game. That's how zerg works...
I think you misunderstand Zerg. There is absolutely no way you get to 8 base zerg at the time carriers arrive. There is no reason either, as at the time skyToss lategame army is up in the air, only the main and 2nd (maybe the third will start to be low too) will be depleted and you can't spend supply to saturate 6 bases. And the playstyle of nutrition with inefficient trade but with a better economy is much weaker since the larvae nerf.
|
I actually made Ravens for the repair drone and matrix, shame to lose the repair and get a turret.
Im no pro by any means, but felt like a repair for my mech army was useful and I dislike the turret in general.
|
Looks like good changes overall except maybe doubling down on the Auto-Turret, but at least they’re trying to keep that in check.
|
Im not zeratul, but i have seen the future: AA missiles will be nerfed.
|
Dreadful changes to the Raven. RIP
|
I'm a Terran player, but I'd say just get rid of the Auto-turret. Limiting its range like that makes it pretty useless, considering a Raven is a big investment early game.
Not sure about the Armor missile though, maybe it has some potential now. Otherwise Raven stays a completely obsolete unit.
|
On January 23 2018 08:05 NewSunshine wrote:
That Disruptor change seems... not particularly elegant. It's not the kind of thing that a player will see and go "oh, that makes perfect sense".
I agree completely. SCII has always been about simple units and simple interactions making a complex game, but this in particular seems a weird rule that doesn't really have any intuitive justification. Its pure patchwork.
Honestly, I don't even feel Disruptor drops even deserve this much attention - they are powerful but they are also a big commitment unlike Mine or Baneling drops. But anyway, thats my opinion.
I am glad we got back the regular ground attack at least.
A simpler change would be to make them take 6/8 cargo space, just like a colossus, so you can only load one per prism.
Though they are a lot smaller than a Colossus in-game, they have the same tech requirements and fullfill similar roles so I don't think it would be terribly inconsistent.
|
really good changes, i like them a lot.
The Raven changes are the most interesting. We will see if the Auto-turret with 1 cast-range is enough to bring back early-game ravens. I personally always felt that the Auto-turret harassment was to easy to pull of.
the buffed Anti-Armor Missile has the potential to be completely broken, especial in TvP.
|
Raven is still deleted. T still has no lategame.
At least the Z/P tears are delicious.
|
On January 23 2018 18:37 Mithriel wrote:
I actually made Ravens for the repair drone and matrix, shame to lose the repair and get a turret.
Im no pro by any means, but felt like a repair for my mech army was useful and I dislike the turret in general.
Mee too, I used the repair drone frequently and it was for me a big thing using the raven.
Mech had a real lategame with the repair drone, it was not used enough to really point out being bad or not useful
|
On January 23 2018 21:04 MrWayne wrote:
really good changes, i like them a lot.
The Raven changes are the most interesting. We will see if the Auto-turret with 1 cast-range is enough to bring back early-game ravens. I personally always felt that the Auto-turret harassment was to easy to pull of.
the buffed Anti-Armor Missile has the potential to be completely broken, especial in TvP.
The anti-armor missile only decreases armor not shields. Which is why this ability is really weak vs Protoss and only useful vs Zerg if you are using bio.
|
If they nerf hidra and keep the nerfs on the infestor, they need to nerf skytoss accordingly.
|
Why does P have 0.7 cd on micro intensive drops while Z can queue 4 overlords with banes and attack with his army and you are literally unable to defend your probes. I cannot comprehend mates
|
It does not look like a patch at all. Minor adjustment. They just rolling back after mistakes for three months. Where is changes in a late game?
Tons of comments from casual players. They should start listening pros. Ask them about balance and do something like research, not random changes for ladder. They playing for money, it's a job for them. It's very important to make sense for them.
|
On January 23 2018 21:48 MockHamill wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 21:04 MrWayne wrote:
really good changes, i like them a lot.
The Raven changes are the most interesting. We will see if the Auto-turret with 1 cast-range is enough to bring back early-game ravens. I personally always felt that the Auto-turret harassment was to easy to pull of.
the buffed Anti-Armor Missile has the potential to be completely broken, especial in TvP. The anti-armor missile only decreases armor not shields. Which is why this ability is really weak vs Protoss and only useful vs Zerg if you are using bio.
You're right about the shields but still I don't think it will be weak vs Protoss.The missile still have 30 dmg and the Protoss army tends to clump together, also without the delay it will be difficult to split against the missile.
|
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad.
|
On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad.
Well Carriers are too strong when massed in all matshups (especially when combined with HT/Tempest). The short term solution is to kill them before they get there (ie when the Carrier count is low). The better solution is probably some kind of massive protest outside of Blizzard HQ until they give in and balance Carriers.
|
|
|
On January 23 2018 23:59 MockHamill wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad. Well Carriers are too strong when massed in all matshups (especially when combined with HT/Tempest). The short term solution is to kill them before they get there (ie when the Carrier count is low). The better solution is probably some kind of massive protest outside of Blizzard HQ until they give in and balance Carriers.
The hydra nerf does not impact lategame at all, or am I missing something ? It'll have an impact during the midgame, that may or may not carry over later on, but I don't see how this patch affects hydras' ability to deal with mass air. By the time the guy in front of you has mass air, you'll have both upgrades, meaning in the same situation as pre-patch (as far as hydras are concerned).
|
Sounds good.
Protoss air needs to be adressed next.
And RT matchmaking is still rubbish.
|
On January 24 2018 00:16 LoneYoShi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 23:59 MockHamill wrote:On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad. Well Carriers are too strong when massed in all matshups (especially when combined with HT/Tempest). The short term solution is to kill them before they get there (ie when the Carrier count is low). The better solution is probably some kind of massive protest outside of Blizzard HQ until they give in and balance Carriers. The hydra nerf does not impact lategame at all, or am I missing something ? It'll have an impact during the midgame, that may or may not carry over later on, but I don't see how this patch affects hydras' ability to deal with mass air. By the time the guy in front of you has mass air, you'll have both upgrades, meaning in the same situation as pre-patch (as far as hydras are concerned).
that s kinda exactly what im saying, Blizz doesnt address at all the skytoss, and by nerfing hydra timings makes the one counter that im aware of (get way ahead in the midgame) harder.
Basically, i wouldnt mind at all the hydra-nerf if the Carriers or storm would have gotten hit as well
|
Is the disruptor that dominant in the game? I keep seeing hundreds of adepts, marines and banelings. God damn, keep calm blizzard..
|
On January 24 2018 00:16 LoneYoShi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 23:59 MockHamill wrote:On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad. Well Carriers are too strong when massed in all matshups (especially when combined with HT/Tempest). The short term solution is to kill them before they get there (ie when the Carrier count is low). The better solution is probably some kind of massive protest outside of Blizzard HQ until they give in and balance Carriers. The hydra nerf does not impact lategame at all, or am I missing something ? It'll have an impact during the midgame, that may or may not carry over later on, but I don't see how this patch affects hydras' ability to deal with mass air. By the time the guy in front of you has mass air, you'll have both upgrades, meaning in the same situation as pre-patch (as far as hydras are concerned).
It doesnt actually impact lategame per se, but protoss lategame is already too strong compared to zerg and protoss will now have a much easier time reaching lategame, since the threat of the allin has been reduced by quite a bit. The ZvP winrate is very much Z favored in the midgame atm, but I bet after the patch Zerg is either gonna switch to even earlier allins (Roach Ravager builds) or just straight up lose after 20 min.
|
Ye, let's lose games we don't deserve to lose for one more week... cmon at least stalker should be a hot fix, not a test map
|
Does anyone have any examples of progames where the stalkers are too strong? Or where protosses defeat good terran players easily?
I'm pretty sure this stalker nerf is hyped by terran whining again. Terran is not underperforming as far as I can tell.
It rather looks like terran is still a bit too strong versus zerg and zerg is now very strong versus protoss.
While terrans can still win with pure bio mine and drops versus protoss without even using ravens or ghosts...
|
On January 24 2018 02:27 Freeborn wrote:
Does anyone have any examples of progames where the stalkers are too strong? Or where protosses defeat good terran players easily?
I'm pretty sure this stalker nerf is hyped by terran whining again. Terran is not underperforming as far as I can tell.
It rather looks like terran is still a bit too strong versus zerg and zerg is now very strong versus protoss.
While terrans can still win with pure bio mine and drops versus protoss without even using ravens or ghosts...
It's not stalkers in a vacuum, it's a combination of buffed stalkers, buffed chargelots, nerfed mine drops etc. Even just the overall match-up winrates aside, the top Terrans themselves all have poor winrates against Protoss on the new patch in tournament matches. The Korean TvP meta at the moment involves lots of 2-base all-ins.
|
How come the new maps are not online yet? It is the 23rd.
|
On January 24 2018 02:47 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 02:27 Freeborn wrote:
Does anyone have any examples of progames where the stalkers are too strong? Or where protosses defeat good terran players easily?
I'm pretty sure this stalker nerf is hyped by terran whining again. Terran is not underperforming as far as I can tell.
It rather looks like terran is still a bit too strong versus zerg and zerg is now very strong versus protoss.
While terrans can still win with pure bio mine and drops versus protoss without even using ravens or ghosts... It's not stalkers in a vacuum, it's a combination of buffed stalkers, buffed chargelots, nerfed mine drops etc. Even just the overall match-up winrates aside, the top Terrans themselves all have poor winrates against Protoss on the new patch in tournament matches. The Korean TvP meta at the moment involves lots of 2-base all-ins.
Definite Examples and sources please?
|
On January 23 2018 22:39 Marvel1 wrote:
Why does P have 0.7 cd on micro intensive drops while Z can queue 4 overlords with banes and attack with his army and you are literally unable to defend your probes. I cannot comprehend mates
Because you have almost zero time to react to disruptor drops targeting your army as Terran, you can at least see bane drops coming on the mini map and have time to pull probes/ reposition units. Disruptor drops can drop the disruptor out of vision range and kill 15+ supply of Terran bio units with Terran having only a second to react or lose a huge chunk of units. Bane dropes can't be used to do constant effecient trades with your opponents army.
|
On January 24 2018 03:09 Freeborn wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 02:47 Elentos wrote:On January 24 2018 02:27 Freeborn wrote:
Does anyone have any examples of progames where the stalkers are too strong? Or where protosses defeat good terran players easily?
I'm pretty sure this stalker nerf is hyped by terran whining again. Terran is not underperforming as far as I can tell.
It rather looks like terran is still a bit too strong versus zerg and zerg is now very strong versus protoss.
While terrans can still win with pure bio mine and drops versus protoss without even using ravens or ghosts... It's not stalkers in a vacuum, it's a combination of buffed stalkers, buffed chargelots, nerfed mine drops etc. Even just the overall match-up winrates aside, the top Terrans themselves all have poor winrates against Protoss on the new patch in tournament matches. The Korean TvP meta at the moment involves lots of 2-base all-ins. Definite Examples and sources please?
PvT is currently at 59%
http://aligulac.com/periods/207/?page=1
For specific games, check any one of these: Classic v T
Then compare the PvT winrates for top Protoss players (Classic, Stats, herO, etc) and TvP winrates for top Terrans (Inno, Maru, TY, etc). The Protoss players all have ~20% higher winrates on average.
|
On January 23 2018 23:59 MockHamill wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad. Well Carriers are too strong when massed in all matshups (especially when combined with HT/Tempest). The short term solution is to kill them before they get there (ie when the Carrier count is low). The better solution is probably some kind of massive protest outside of Blizzard HQ until they give in and balance Carriers.
It's a combinaison of strength that make the skytoss unbeatable :
Mass carriers can nearly beat everything alone, even corruptors.
Add some void with charge and you kill corruptors so fast, so no way you can beat voids/carriers with full corruptors.
Add high templar with storm just deal a enormous dmg, while the fight is already P favored.
Feedback prevents use of mass caster like mass vipers for abduct/spores style or PB.
Revelation on zerg army give full vision for toss, and Zerg army is much slower than toss while weaker.
Tempests can also be build and counter mass spores style or broodlords while revelation provide full vision and zerg has no way not to take free dmg as tempest outrange everything.
Not to mention protoss army is invisible lol thx to mother ship.
Add archons that can hit ground and air with spash and +bio dmg. Chargelots/DT and warp/recall mecanism and it's so easy to kill Zerg base, so when Zerg is forced into some broodlords/corruptors the army can't defend all bases.
|
On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad.
The same way Terran deals with Zerg and Protoss late game, kill them before they get there. It's the answer for Terran Zerg have always said was totally fine so why can't it work for zerg?
|
On January 24 2018 03:51 washikie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad. The same way Terran deals with Zerg and Protoss late game, kill them before they get there. It's the answer for Terran Zerg have always said was totally fine so why can't it work for zerg?
The problem is that its easier for Terran to kill Zerg before he gets lategame, than fir Zerg to kill Protoss. Especially when Blizzard nerfs the only viable midgsme composition which are Hydras at most. Now, only stupid Protoss doesn't turtle and go straight into air sending adepts ora zealots with warprisms to harras. It will be autowin for Protoss.
|
On January 24 2018 03:51 washikie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad. The same way Terran deals with Zerg and Protoss late game, kill them before they get there. It's the answer for Terran Zerg have always said was totally fine so why can't it work for zerg?
You re suggestin Terran cant beat zerg lategame? splitmap scenarios favor Terrans very heavily, granted, Zerg can fight back, unlike zvP, but mass ghost and lots of fortified positions is definitely +EV for Terrans. And as far as i can tell, terrans can win late-lategame even without those, albeit less likely
|
On January 24 2018 04:54 Geo.Rion wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 03:51 washikie wrote:On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad. The same way Terran deals with Zerg and Protoss late game, kill them before they get there. It's the answer for Terran Zerg have always said was totally fine so why can't it work for zerg? You re suggestin Terran cant beat zerg lategame? splitmap scenarios favor Terrans very heavily, granted, Zerg can fight back, unlike zvP, but mass ghost and lots of fortified positions is definitely +EV for Terrans. And as far as i can tell, terrans can win late-lategame even without those, albeit less likely
Lategame TvZ favors Zerg just like lategame PvZ favors Protoss. Therefore, the burden is on Zerg to kill Protoss before lategame just like the burden is on Terran to kill Zerg before lategame.
Zerg has the advantage of insta-remax in the lategame once both sides have huge banks. Protoss doesn't care about this since the Skytoss+Templar deathball can beat the shit out of Zerg several times over, but insta-remax works very well against Terran. Similarly, Protoss has mothership recall and nexus recall to teleport their big slow deathball around but Terran's deathball doesn't and is even slower because Tanks+Libs need to siege up. And most importantly, a lategame Protoss army exploits the lack of Zerg AA while a lategame Terran army is ground-based.
It's not like Terran never beats Zerg or Zerg never beats Protoss, but the fact that lategame favors certain races over others is pretty obvious. Terrans with gosu ghost micro can land snipes and trade cost efficiently. Zergs with great positioning can abduct and pick off expensive tech units. And so on.
But broadly speaking, lategame goes P > Z > T
|
On January 24 2018 04:54 Geo.Rion wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 03:51 washikie wrote:On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad. The same way Terran deals with Zerg and Protoss late game, kill them before they get there. It's the answer for Terran Zerg have always said was totally fine so why can't it work for zerg? You re suggestin Terran cant beat zerg lategame? splitmap scenarios favor Terrans very heavily, granted, Zerg can fight back, unlike zvP, but mass ghost and lots of fortified positions is definitely +EV for Terrans. And as far as i can tell, terrans can win late-lategame even without those, albeit less likely
Splitmap just doesn't happen anymore.
|
On January 24 2018 05:44 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 04:54 Geo.Rion wrote:On January 24 2018 03:51 washikie wrote:On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad. The same way Terran deals with Zerg and Protoss late game, kill them before they get there. It's the answer for Terran Zerg have always said was totally fine so why can't it work for zerg? You re suggestin Terran cant beat zerg lategame? splitmap scenarios favor Terrans very heavily, granted, Zerg can fight back, unlike zvP, but mass ghost and lots of fortified positions is definitely +EV for Terrans. And as far as i can tell, terrans can win late-lategame even without those, albeit less likely Lategame TvZ favors Zerg just like lategame PvZ favors Protoss. Therefore, the burden is on Zerg to kill Protoss before lategame just like the burden is on Terran to kill Zerg before lategame. Zerg has the advantage of insta-remax in the lategame once both sides have huge banks. Protoss doesn't care about this since the Skytoss+Templar deathball can beat the shit out of Zerg several times over, but insta-remax works very well against Terran. Similarly, Protoss has mothership recall and nexus recall to teleport their big slow deathball around but Terran's deathball doesn't and is even slower because Tanks+Libs need to siege up. And most importantly, a lategame Protoss army exploits the lack of Zerg AA while a lategame Terran army is ground-based. It's not like Terran never beats Zerg or Zerg never beats Protoss, but the fact that lategame favors certain races over others is pretty obvious. Terrans with gosu ghost micro can land snipes and trade cost efficiently. Zergs with great positioning can abduct and pick off expensive tech units. And so on. But broadly speaking, lategame goes P > Z > T
I wonder how Zerg can "kill before lategame" Protoss, when Blizz is nerfin Zerg's midgame. Should i make early allin
every PvZ?
|
I'm expecting all ZvP to be turtle into lurker broodlord from now on. Get ready for cancer.
|
On January 24 2018 03:39 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 03:09 Freeborn wrote:On January 24 2018 02:47 Elentos wrote:On January 24 2018 02:27 Freeborn wrote:
Does anyone have any examples of progames where the stalkers are too strong? Or where protosses defeat good terran players easily?
I'm pretty sure this stalker nerf is hyped by terran whining again. Terran is not underperforming as far as I can tell.
It rather looks like terran is still a bit too strong versus zerg and zerg is now very strong versus protoss.
While terrans can still win with pure bio mine and drops versus protoss without even using ravens or ghosts... It's not stalkers in a vacuum, it's a combination of buffed stalkers, buffed chargelots, nerfed mine drops etc. Even just the overall match-up winrates aside, the top Terrans themselves all have poor winrates against Protoss on the new patch in tournament matches. The Korean TvP meta at the moment involves lots of 2-base all-ins. Definite Examples and sources please? PvT is currently at 59% http://aligulac.com/periods/207/?page=1For specific games, check any one of these: Classic v TThen compare the PvT winrates for top Protoss players (Classic, Stats, herO, etc) and TvP winrates for top Terrans (Inno, Maru, TY, etc). The Protoss players all have ~20% higher winrates on average.
lul, buddy linking a aligulac period that is less than a week in.
a few weeks ago I saw it was like 57%, then evened out to 51%, haha.
looking at past ones we have 51%, 52%, 52%
...
|
I feel like the disruptor change is incredibly ugly. I don't have a suggestion myself though.
|
On January 24 2018 07:09 youngjiddle wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 03:39 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 03:09 Freeborn wrote:On January 24 2018 02:47 Elentos wrote:On January 24 2018 02:27 Freeborn wrote:
Does anyone have any examples of progames where the stalkers are too strong? Or where protosses defeat good terran players easily?
I'm pretty sure this stalker nerf is hyped by terran whining again. Terran is not underperforming as far as I can tell.
It rather looks like terran is still a bit too strong versus zerg and zerg is now very strong versus protoss.
While terrans can still win with pure bio mine and drops versus protoss without even using ravens or ghosts... It's not stalkers in a vacuum, it's a combination of buffed stalkers, buffed chargelots, nerfed mine drops etc. Even just the overall match-up winrates aside, the top Terrans themselves all have poor winrates against Protoss on the new patch in tournament matches. The Korean TvP meta at the moment involves lots of 2-base all-ins. Definite Examples and sources please? PvT is currently at 59% http://aligulac.com/periods/207/?page=1For specific games, check any one of these: Classic v TThen compare the PvT winrates for top Protoss players (Classic, Stats, herO, etc) and TvP winrates for top Terrans (Inno, Maru, TY, etc). The Protoss players all have ~20% higher winrates on average. lul, buddy linking a aligulac period that is only a week in. a few weeks ago I saw it was like 57%, then evened out to 51%, haha. looking at past ones we have 51%, 52%, 52% ...
If you want a more detailed collection of stats:
PvT for Nov/Dec was at 53%. You left out the first December period at 55%, and before that was 56%.
Summing the last and current period (January games till now) gives us 363/667 games, or 54%. Currently, of course, PvT is at 59%.
PvT for top pros (games and series):
Stats: 81% and 92%
Classic: 80% and 90%
herO: 78% and 88%
sOs: 75% and 83%
Zest: 70% and 77%
TvP for top pros (games and series):
aLive: 57% and 66%
Inno: 56% and 61%
Maru: 52% and 61%
Gumiho: 50% and 51%
TY: 27% and 18%
Obviously, this data is not perfect. If PvT was balanced we would expect some players to have advantages and others disadvantages. We would expect statistical noise randomly in favor of Protoss or Terran. A single top Protoss doing well or a single period favoring Protoss is perfectly normal for a balanced matchup.
But when all the periods, all the pros, and all the data are pointing towards Protoss > Terran across the board, as they are right now, that's an indication that something is wrong with the matchup.
|
On January 24 2018 05:44 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 04:54 Geo.Rion wrote:On January 24 2018 03:51 washikie wrote:On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad. The same way Terran deals with Zerg and Protoss late game, kill them before they get there. It's the answer for Terran Zerg have always said was totally fine so why can't it work for zerg? You re suggestin Terran cant beat zerg lategame? splitmap scenarios favor Terrans very heavily, granted, Zerg can fight back, unlike zvP, but mass ghost and lots of fortified positions is definitely +EV for Terrans. And as far as i can tell, terrans can win late-lategame even without those, albeit less likely Lategame TvZ favors Zerg just like lategame PvZ favors Protoss. Therefore, the burden is on Zerg to kill Protoss before lategame just like the burden is on Terran to kill Zerg before lategame. Zerg has the advantage of insta-remax in the lategame once both sides have huge banks. Protoss doesn't care about this since the Skytoss+Templar deathball can beat the shit out of Zerg several times over, but insta-remax works very well against Terran. Similarly, Protoss has mothership recall and nexus recall to teleport their big slow deathball around but Terran's deathball doesn't and is even slower because Tanks+Libs need to siege up. And most importantly, a lategame Protoss army exploits the lack of Zerg AA while a lategame Terran army is ground-based. It's not like Terran never beats Zerg or Zerg never beats Protoss, but the fact that lategame favors certain races over others is pretty obvious. Terrans with gosu ghost micro can land snipes and trade cost efficiently. Zergs with great positioning can abduct and pick off expensive tech units. And so on. But broadly speaking, lategame goes P > Z > T
That's funny, how using ability when T does it become "gosu micro", but not when it's abduct or storm while it's exactly the same lol.
Seen soO streaming and lost vs terran mass ghost on late game, he said "Terran imba".
Late game is completly winnable for T vs Z right now.
|
Super disappointed about the hydra nerf. Wish they'd try and find some way to meet in the middle, either with the cost or the research time.
The problem is that it's just so much damn gas, especially if I'm playing hydra/ling/lurk. The new burrow speed upgrade for lurkers is fun as hell, but it's hard to find the spare gas to get it at a reasonable time.
I guess since the predominant styles in both ZvP and ZvT is still hydra/ling/bling a nerf was warranted. The problem is that it kind of nerfs hydras into the ground (especially in ZvP). It's a very timing oriented unit. If you miss the window you're kind of almost better off making something else.
|
On January 24 2018 07:54 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 05:44 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 04:54 Geo.Rion wrote:On January 24 2018 03:51 washikie wrote:On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad. The same way Terran deals with Zerg and Protoss late game, kill them before they get there. It's the answer for Terran Zerg have always said was totally fine so why can't it work for zerg? You re suggestin Terran cant beat zerg lategame? splitmap scenarios favor Terrans very heavily, granted, Zerg can fight back, unlike zvP, but mass ghost and lots of fortified positions is definitely +EV for Terrans. And as far as i can tell, terrans can win late-lategame even without those, albeit less likely Lategame TvZ favors Zerg just like lategame PvZ favors Protoss. Therefore, the burden is on Zerg to kill Protoss before lategame just like the burden is on Terran to kill Zerg before lategame. Zerg has the advantage of insta-remax in the lategame once both sides have huge banks. Protoss doesn't care about this since the Skytoss+Templar deathball can beat the shit out of Zerg several times over, but insta-remax works very well against Terran. Similarly, Protoss has mothership recall and nexus recall to teleport their big slow deathball around but Terran's deathball doesn't and is even slower because Tanks+Libs need to siege up. And most importantly, a lategame Protoss army exploits the lack of Zerg AA while a lategame Terran army is ground-based. It's not like Terran never beats Zerg or Zerg never beats Protoss, but the fact that lategame favors certain races over others is pretty obvious. Terrans with gosu ghost micro can land snipes and trade cost efficiently. Zergs with great positioning can abduct and pick off expensive tech units. And so on. But broadly speaking, lategame goes P > Z > T That's funny, how using ability when T does it become "gosu micro", but not when it's abduct or storm while it's exactly the same lol. Seen soO streaming and lost vs terran mass ghost on late game, he said "Terran imba". Late game is completly winnable for T vs Z right now.
.........
Did you even read my post?
You are complaining that I am somehow bashing storm/abduct because I used synonymous adjectives?
Terrans with gosu ghost micro can land snipes and trade cost efficiently. Zergs with great positioning can abduct and pick off expensive tech units.
I used the term "great positioning" to describe abduct usage, because I didn't want to repeat myself and use "gosu micro" twice. Quibble over semantics if you like, but "great positioning" is not an insult and I wasn't bashing abduct/storm.
And last I checked, neither abduct nor storm have a 1.43 second delay between click and cast, so no it's not exactly the same at all.
You said soO bitches about Terran. I've seen Stats bitch about Zerg and Inno bitch about Protoss. Progamers are people too, they get frustrated like anyone else.
And you say that lategame TvZ is winnable for Terran......It's not like Terran never beats Zerg is what I said.
So basically, you complained about two things I never said, and then repeated what I said. Seriously man, at least read my post before you bash it.
|
On January 23 2018 08:07 Solar424 wrote:
Zerg masses one unit for 7 months: Nerf it to the ground.
Terran masses one unit for 7 years: That's okay, they're the highest skilled race.
User was temp banned for this post.
What unit? Are you referring to the supply depot?
I've never seen a successful bio-Terran player a-move. Or even split the army into 3 groups and a-move each. What do you mean by 'mass'?
Marine-Marauder-Medivac-Mine is actually one of the most expensive compositions in terms of production time. It takes so many facilities and if you think about it:
Supply Depot -> Barracks & Tech lab-> Factory & Ebay -> Starport
It's clearly somewhere between a Tier 2 and Tier 3 composition.
Plus, without micro skills and multitasking, Bio fails hard.
|
On January 24 2018 08:03 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 07:54 Tyrhanius wrote:On January 24 2018 05:44 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 04:54 Geo.Rion wrote:On January 24 2018 03:51 washikie wrote:On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad. The same way Terran deals with Zerg and Protoss late game, kill them before they get there. It's the answer for Terran Zerg have always said was totally fine so why can't it work for zerg? You re suggestin Terran cant beat zerg lategame? splitmap scenarios favor Terrans very heavily, granted, Zerg can fight back, unlike zvP, but mass ghost and lots of fortified positions is definitely +EV for Terrans. And as far as i can tell, terrans can win late-lategame even without those, albeit less likely Lategame TvZ favors Zerg just like lategame PvZ favors Protoss. Therefore, the burden is on Zerg to kill Protoss before lategame just like the burden is on Terran to kill Zerg before lategame. Zerg has the advantage of insta-remax in the lategame once both sides have huge banks. Protoss doesn't care about this since the Skytoss+Templar deathball can beat the shit out of Zerg several times over, but insta-remax works very well against Terran. Similarly, Protoss has mothership recall and nexus recall to teleport their big slow deathball around but Terran's deathball doesn't and is even slower because Tanks+Libs need to siege up. And most importantly, a lategame Protoss army exploits the lack of Zerg AA while a lategame Terran army is ground-based. It's not like Terran never beats Zerg or Zerg never beats Protoss, but the fact that lategame favors certain races over others is pretty obvious. Terrans with gosu ghost micro can land snipes and trade cost efficiently. Zergs with great positioning can abduct and pick off expensive tech units. And so on. But broadly speaking, lategame goes P > Z > T That's funny, how using ability when T does it become "gosu micro", but not when it's abduct or storm while it's exactly the same lol. Seen soO streaming and lost vs terran mass ghost on late game, he said "Terran imba". Late game is completly winnable for T vs Z right now. ......... Did you even read my post? You are complaining that I am somehow bashing storm/abduct because I used synonymous adjectives? Terrans with gosu ghost micro can land snipes and trade cost efficiently. Zergs with great positioning can abduct and pick off expensive tech units.
I used the term "great positioning" to describe abduct usage, because I didn't want to repeat myself and use "gosu micro" twice. Quibble over semantics if you like, but "great positioning" is not an insult and I wasn't bashing abduct/storm. And last I checked, neither abduct nor storm have a 1.43 second delay between click and cast, so no it's not exactly the same at all. You said soO bitches about Terran. I've seen Stats bitch about Zerg and Inno bitch about Protoss. Progamers are people too, they get frustrated like anyone else. And you say that lategame TvZ is winnable for Terran...... It's not like Terran never beats Zerg is what I said. So basically, you complained about two things I never said, and then repeated what I said. Seriously man, at least read my post before you bash it.
He's not arguing with you. He's just interjecting his own point: that ANY zerg can abduct well, whereas it truly takes "Gosu-level" micro for a Terran to use the Snipe ability effectively.
|
On January 24 2018 07:36 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 07:09 youngjiddle wrote:On January 24 2018 03:39 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 03:09 Freeborn wrote:On January 24 2018 02:47 Elentos wrote:On January 24 2018 02:27 Freeborn wrote:
Does anyone have any examples of progames where the stalkers are too strong? Or where protosses defeat good terran players easily?
I'm pretty sure this stalker nerf is hyped by terran whining again. Terran is not underperforming as far as I can tell.
It rather looks like terran is still a bit too strong versus zerg and zerg is now very strong versus protoss.
While terrans can still win with pure bio mine and drops versus protoss without even using ravens or ghosts... It's not stalkers in a vacuum, it's a combination of buffed stalkers, buffed chargelots, nerfed mine drops etc. Even just the overall match-up winrates aside, the top Terrans themselves all have poor winrates against Protoss on the new patch in tournament matches. The Korean TvP meta at the moment involves lots of 2-base all-ins. Definite Examples and sources please? PvT is currently at 59% http://aligulac.com/periods/207/?page=1For specific games, check any one of these: Classic v TThen compare the PvT winrates for top Protoss players (Classic, Stats, herO, etc) and TvP winrates for top Terrans (Inno, Maru, TY, etc). The Protoss players all have ~20% higher winrates on average. lul, buddy linking a aligulac period that is only a week in. a few weeks ago I saw it was like 57%, then evened out to 51%, haha. looking at past ones we have 51%, 52%, 52% ... If you want a more detailed collection of stats: PvT for Nov/Dec was at 53%. You left out the first December period at 55%, and before that was 56%. Summing the last and current period (January games till now) gives us 363/667 games, or 54%. Currently, of course, PvT is at 59%. PvT for top pros (games and series):
Stats: 81% and 92% Classic: 80% and 90% herO: 78% and 88% sOs: 75% and 83% Zest: 70% and 77% TvP for top pros (games and series):
aLive: 57% and 66% Inno: 56% and 61% Maru: 52% and 61% Gumiho: 50% and 51% TY: 27% and 18% Obviously, this data is not perfect. If PvT was balanced we would expect some players to have advantages and others disadvantages. We would expect statistical noise randomly in favor of Protoss or Terran. A single top Protoss doing well or a single period favoring Protoss is perfectly normal for a balanced matchup. But when all the periods, all the pros, and all the data are pointing towards Protoss > Terran across the board, as they are right now, that's an indication that something is wrong with the matchup.
no, you're being biased.
LMFAO how can you put up """""""""stats"""""""" like "vs top pros or series" when for example, stats has an 85.71% winrate with only 14 games played. LMFAO, 14 games confirmed proper statistics to use in an arguement.
These six series where he played bunny, keen, and cure? lmfao.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On January 24 2018 09:32 youngjiddle wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 07:36 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 07:09 youngjiddle wrote:On January 24 2018 03:39 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 03:09 Freeborn wrote:On January 24 2018 02:47 Elentos wrote:On January 24 2018 02:27 Freeborn wrote:
Does anyone have any examples of progames where the stalkers are too strong? Or where protosses defeat good terran players easily?
I'm pretty sure this stalker nerf is hyped by terran whining again. Terran is not underperforming as far as I can tell.
It rather looks like terran is still a bit too strong versus zerg and zerg is now very strong versus protoss.
While terrans can still win with pure bio mine and drops versus protoss without even using ravens or ghosts... It's not stalkers in a vacuum, it's a combination of buffed stalkers, buffed chargelots, nerfed mine drops etc. Even just the overall match-up winrates aside, the top Terrans themselves all have poor winrates against Protoss on the new patch in tournament matches. The Korean TvP meta at the moment involves lots of 2-base all-ins. Definite Examples and sources please? PvT is currently at 59% http://aligulac.com/periods/207/?page=1For specific games, check any one of these: Classic v TThen compare the PvT winrates for top Protoss players (Classic, Stats, herO, etc) and TvP winrates for top Terrans (Inno, Maru, TY, etc). The Protoss players all have ~20% higher winrates on average. lul, buddy linking a aligulac period that is only a week in. a few weeks ago I saw it was like 57%, then evened out to 51%, haha. looking at past ones we have 51%, 52%, 52% ... If you want a more detailed collection of stats: PvT for Nov/Dec was at 53%. You left out the first December period at 55%, and before that was 56%. Summing the last and current period (January games till now) gives us 363/667 games, or 54%. Currently, of course, PvT is at 59%. PvT for top pros (games and series):
Stats: 81% and 92% Classic: 80% and 90% herO: 78% and 88% sOs: 75% and 83% Zest: 70% and 77% TvP for top pros (games and series):
aLive: 57% and 66% Inno: 56% and 61% Maru: 52% and 61% Gumiho: 50% and 51% TY: 27% and 18% Obviously, this data is not perfect. If PvT was balanced we would expect some players to have advantages and others disadvantages. We would expect statistical noise randomly in favor of Protoss or Terran. A single top Protoss doing well or a single period favoring Protoss is perfectly normal for a balanced matchup. But when all the periods, all the pros, and all the data are pointing towards Protoss > Terran across the board, as they are right now, that's an indication that something is wrong with the matchup. no, you're being biased. LMFAO how can you put up """""""""stats"""""""" like "vs top pros or series" when for example, stats has an 85.71% winrate with only 14 games played. LMFAO, 14 games confirmed proper statistics to use in an arguement. These six series where he played bunny, keen, and cure? lmfao.
Ah, it's youngjiddle again isn't it?
Checks name
Yep, thought so. No point in discussing anything here then. Hope you enjoy the stalker nerf.
|
On January 24 2018 10:47 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 09:32 youngjiddle wrote:On January 24 2018 07:36 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 07:09 youngjiddle wrote:On January 24 2018 03:39 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 03:09 Freeborn wrote:On January 24 2018 02:47 Elentos wrote:On January 24 2018 02:27 Freeborn wrote:
Does anyone have any examples of progames where the stalkers are too strong? Or where protosses defeat good terran players easily?
I'm pretty sure this stalker nerf is hyped by terran whining again. Terran is not underperforming as far as I can tell.
It rather looks like terran is still a bit too strong versus zerg and zerg is now very strong versus protoss.
While terrans can still win with pure bio mine and drops versus protoss without even using ravens or ghosts... It's not stalkers in a vacuum, it's a combination of buffed stalkers, buffed chargelots, nerfed mine drops etc. Even just the overall match-up winrates aside, the top Terrans themselves all have poor winrates against Protoss on the new patch in tournament matches. The Korean TvP meta at the moment involves lots of 2-base all-ins. Definite Examples and sources please? PvT is currently at 59% http://aligulac.com/periods/207/?page=1For specific games, check any one of these: Classic v TThen compare the PvT winrates for top Protoss players (Classic, Stats, herO, etc) and TvP winrates for top Terrans (Inno, Maru, TY, etc). The Protoss players all have ~20% higher winrates on average. lul, buddy linking a aligulac period that is only a week in. a few weeks ago I saw it was like 57%, then evened out to 51%, haha. looking at past ones we have 51%, 52%, 52% ... If you want a more detailed collection of stats: PvT for Nov/Dec was at 53%. You left out the first December period at 55%, and before that was 56%. Summing the last and current period (January games till now) gives us 363/667 games, or 54%. Currently, of course, PvT is at 59%. PvT for top pros (games and series):
Stats: 81% and 92% Classic: 80% and 90% herO: 78% and 88% sOs: 75% and 83% Zest: 70% and 77% TvP for top pros (games and series):
aLive: 57% and 66% Inno: 56% and 61% Maru: 52% and 61% Gumiho: 50% and 51% TY: 27% and 18% Obviously, this data is not perfect. If PvT was balanced we would expect some players to have advantages and others disadvantages. We would expect statistical noise randomly in favor of Protoss or Terran. A single top Protoss doing well or a single period favoring Protoss is perfectly normal for a balanced matchup. But when all the periods, all the pros, and all the data are pointing towards Protoss > Terran across the board, as they are right now, that's an indication that something is wrong with the matchup. no, you're being biased. LMFAO how can you put up """""""""stats"""""""" like "vs top pros or series" when for example, stats has an 85.71% winrate with only 14 games played. LMFAO, 14 games confirmed proper statistics to use in an arguement. These six series where he played bunny, keen, and cure? lmfao. Ah, it's youngjiddle again isn't it? Checks nameYep, thought so. No point in discussing anything here then. Hope you enjoy the stalker nerf.
Don't know where you are getting your numbers from besides cherrypicking, cause just looking at INnovation alone, hes at 65% WR vP -
http://aligulac.com/players/48-INnoVation/
If you go just from Dec 2017, hes at 59% http://aligulac.com/players/48/results/?after=2017-12-01&before=&event=&race=p&country=all&bestof=all&offline=both&game=all&wcs_season=&wcs_tier=&op=
TY had similar winrates when i checked earlier today. Basically, all it proves is that Classic is on fire right now (take Classic away, and Innovation is over 90% WR!), and all top terrans still beat protoss pretty handily.
Take away Neeb in smaller tournaments from aligac and see Protoss winrates drop to under 50% vT. You can't seriously use this as the source for your balance whine?
Terran has been the dominate race for 7 years now, it was nice to have a patch that was getting closer to being fair.. but 3 weeks of "slightly" favorable protoss results end up with the terran crybabies threatening to quit the game and pestering blizzard to make changes already.. yet when Protoss was 42% WR vs Terran last year, blizzard said "We'll wait 6 months to see how the balance plays out".. this game's bias is LOL-worthy.
|
On January 24 2018 03:23 washikie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 22:39 Marvel1 wrote:
Why does P have 0.7 cd on micro intensive drops while Z can queue 4 overlords with banes and attack with his army and you are literally unable to defend your probes. I cannot comprehend mates Because you have almost zero time to react to disruptor drops targeting your army as Terran, you can at least see bane drops coming on the mini map and have time to pull probes/ reposition units. Disruptor drops can drop the disruptor out of vision range and kill 15+ supply of Terran bio units with Terran having only a second to react or lose a huge chunk of units. Bane dropes can't be used to do constant effecient trades with your opponents army.
Yeah, they will blow up AT LEAST one of your bases from probes, and thats even better than trading armies, you will pull maybe 1 base of probes, messy, when you are facing 3 queued drops and a push of an z army, trust me, do you even read man, and to hell with good trading if you cant back it up economically. 15+ supply of terran bio units? like 35? more like 3 marines and a marauder and only if he dont react, its a nova not a nuke, you can split your army if you know what P is doing but you are too slow to run around everytime, Koreans are getting ripped by mass bane drops mid-late game almost always, and still the cost of teching dis prism is so high that this isnt even that hurting for T to lose some units, and you have 2 disruptors that are good against mostly ghosts nothing more,
tl;dr these drops should not be nerfed at all cause are micro intensive, costly and are not winning games by themselves at all compared to 3 queued liberators attacking from nowhere while you are fighting
|
On January 24 2018 12:57 SnowfaLL wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 10:47 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 09:32 youngjiddle wrote:On January 24 2018 07:36 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 07:09 youngjiddle wrote:On January 24 2018 03:39 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 03:09 Freeborn wrote:On January 24 2018 02:47 Elentos wrote:On January 24 2018 02:27 Freeborn wrote:
Does anyone have any examples of progames where the stalkers are too strong? Or where protosses defeat good terran players easily?
I'm pretty sure this stalker nerf is hyped by terran whining again. Terran is not underperforming as far as I can tell.
It rather looks like terran is still a bit too strong versus zerg and zerg is now very strong versus protoss.
While terrans can still win with pure bio mine and drops versus protoss without even using ravens or ghosts... It's not stalkers in a vacuum, it's a combination of buffed stalkers, buffed chargelots, nerfed mine drops etc. Even just the overall match-up winrates aside, the top Terrans themselves all have poor winrates against Protoss on the new patch in tournament matches. The Korean TvP meta at the moment involves lots of 2-base all-ins. Definite Examples and sources please? PvT is currently at 59% http://aligulac.com/periods/207/?page=1For specific games, check any one of these: Classic v TThen compare the PvT winrates for top Protoss players (Classic, Stats, herO, etc) and TvP winrates for top Terrans (Inno, Maru, TY, etc). The Protoss players all have ~20% higher winrates on average. lul, buddy linking a aligulac period that is only a week in. a few weeks ago I saw it was like 57%, then evened out to 51%, haha. looking at past ones we have 51%, 52%, 52% ... If you want a more detailed collection of stats: PvT for Nov/Dec was at 53%. You left out the first December period at 55%, and before that was 56%. Summing the last and current period (January games till now) gives us 363/667 games, or 54%. Currently, of course, PvT is at 59%. PvT for top pros (games and series):
Stats: 81% and 92% Classic: 80% and 90% herO: 78% and 88% sOs: 75% and 83% Zest: 70% and 77% TvP for top pros (games and series):
aLive: 57% and 66% Inno: 56% and 61% Maru: 52% and 61% Gumiho: 50% and 51% TY: 27% and 18% Obviously, this data is not perfect. If PvT was balanced we would expect some players to have advantages and others disadvantages. We would expect statistical noise randomly in favor of Protoss or Terran. A single top Protoss doing well or a single period favoring Protoss is perfectly normal for a balanced matchup. But when all the periods, all the pros, and all the data are pointing towards Protoss > Terran across the board, as they are right now, that's an indication that something is wrong with the matchup. no, you're being biased. LMFAO how can you put up """""""""stats"""""""" like "vs top pros or series" when for example, stats has an 85.71% winrate with only 14 games played. LMFAO, 14 games confirmed proper statistics to use in an arguement. These six series where he played bunny, keen, and cure? lmfao. Ah, it's youngjiddle again isn't it? Checks nameYep, thought so. No point in discussing anything here then. Hope you enjoy the stalker nerf. Don't know where you are getting your numbers from besides cherrypicking, cause just looking at INnovation alone, hes at 65% WR vP - http://aligulac.com/players/48-INnoVation/If you go just from Dec 2017, hes at 59% http://aligulac.com/players/48/results/?after=2017-12-01&before=&event=&race=p&country=all&bestof=all&offline=both&game=all&wcs_season=&wcs_tier=&op=TY had similar winrates when i checked earlier today. Basically, all it proves is that Classic is on fire right now (take Classic away, and Innovation is over 90% WR!), and all top terrans still beat protoss pretty handily. Take away Neeb in smaller tournaments from aligac and see Protoss winrates drop to under 50% vT. You can't seriously use this as the source for your balance whine? Terran has been the dominate race for 7 years now, it was nice to have a patch that was getting closer to being fair.. but 3 weeks of "slightly" favorable protoss results end up with the terran crybabies threatening to quit the game and pestering blizzard to make changes already.. yet when Protoss was 42% WR vs Terran last year, blizzard said "We'll wait 6 months to see how the balance plays out".. this game's bias is LOL-worthy.
"Terran has been the dominate race for 7 years now......"
Terran has certainly had periods of dominance like GomTvT but to ignore BL/Infestor, the Blink era, PvProleague, etc, is pure biased bullshit. The only thing LOL-worthy here is your victim complex and hypocrisy.
For the pros, I was using post-4.0 as the date, and if you bothered reading my post instead of wallowing in self-pity you'd see that I said myself that the data was flawed–so we have to aggregate all the sources, from aligulac in general to specific tournaments and then specific players. In all cases Protoss is at the very least 50%+ and in some cases far beyond that, which indicates that there's systemic Protoss-favored imbalance in the matchup.
But go on, keep crying about crybabies. You cite Terrans clinging to imbalance in their favor after 3.8 while doing the exact same thing ater 4.0. The irony is hilarious.
|
On January 24 2018 09:16 KR_4EVR wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 08:03 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 07:54 Tyrhanius wrote:On January 24 2018 05:44 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 04:54 Geo.Rion wrote:On January 24 2018 03:51 washikie wrote:On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad. The same way Terran deals with Zerg and Protoss late game, kill them before they get there. It's the answer for Terran Zerg have always said was totally fine so why can't it work for zerg? You re suggestin Terran cant beat zerg lategame? splitmap scenarios favor Terrans very heavily, granted, Zerg can fight back, unlike zvP, but mass ghost and lots of fortified positions is definitely +EV for Terrans. And as far as i can tell, terrans can win late-lategame even without those, albeit less likely Lategame TvZ favors Zerg just like lategame PvZ favors Protoss. Therefore, the burden is on Zerg to kill Protoss before lategame just like the burden is on Terran to kill Zerg before lategame. Zerg has the advantage of insta-remax in the lategame once both sides have huge banks. Protoss doesn't care about this since the Skytoss+Templar deathball can beat the shit out of Zerg several times over, but insta-remax works very well against Terran. Similarly, Protoss has mothership recall and nexus recall to teleport their big slow deathball around but Terran's deathball doesn't and is even slower because Tanks+Libs need to siege up. And most importantly, a lategame Protoss army exploits the lack of Zerg AA while a lategame Terran army is ground-based. It's not like Terran never beats Zerg or Zerg never beats Protoss, but the fact that lategame favors certain races over others is pretty obvious. Terrans with gosu ghost micro can land snipes and trade cost efficiently. Zergs with great positioning can abduct and pick off expensive tech units. And so on. But broadly speaking, lategame goes P > Z > T That's funny, how using ability when T does it become "gosu micro", but not when it's abduct or storm while it's exactly the same lol. Seen soO streaming and lost vs terran mass ghost on late game, he said "Terran imba". Late game is completly winnable for T vs Z right now. ......... Did you even read my post? You are complaining that I am somehow bashing storm/abduct because I used synonymous adjectives? Terrans with gosu ghost micro can land snipes and trade cost efficiently. Zergs with great positioning can abduct and pick off expensive tech units.
I used the term "great positioning" to describe abduct usage, because I didn't want to repeat myself and use "gosu micro" twice. Quibble over semantics if you like, but "great positioning" is not an insult and I wasn't bashing abduct/storm. And last I checked, neither abduct nor storm have a 1.43 second delay between click and cast, so no it's not exactly the same at all. You said soO bitches about Terran. I've seen Stats bitch about Zerg and Inno bitch about Protoss. Progamers are people too, they get frustrated like anyone else. And you say that lategame TvZ is winnable for Terran...... It's not like Terran never beats Zerg is what I said. So basically, you complained about two things I never said, and then repeated what I said. Seriously man, at least read my post before you bash it. He's not arguing with you. He's just interjecting his own point: that ANY zerg can abduct well, whereas it truly takes "Gosu-level" micro for a Terran to use the Snipe ability effectively.
I'm just joking about Terran players so arrogant. When they split 2 units "gosu godlike micro", when they use an ability "trutly gosu micro".
It's so ridiculous, diamond player knows how to use ghosts, it's just pressing a touch lol.
It's not harder than using any ability, but yeah when T suddently start using a caster once in a blue moon it's "gosu micro", while Z/P using regulary a set of 2-3 casters is "Noob A move".
|
On January 24 2018 14:45 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 09:16 KR_4EVR wrote:On January 24 2018 08:03 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 07:54 Tyrhanius wrote:On January 24 2018 05:44 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 04:54 Geo.Rion wrote:On January 24 2018 03:51 washikie wrote:On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad. The same way Terran deals with Zerg and Protoss late game, kill them before they get there. It's the answer for Terran Zerg have always said was totally fine so why can't it work for zerg? You re suggestin Terran cant beat zerg lategame? splitmap scenarios favor Terrans very heavily, granted, Zerg can fight back, unlike zvP, but mass ghost and lots of fortified positions is definitely +EV for Terrans. And as far as i can tell, terrans can win late-lategame even without those, albeit less likely Lategame TvZ favors Zerg just like lategame PvZ favors Protoss. Therefore, the burden is on Zerg to kill Protoss before lategame just like the burden is on Terran to kill Zerg before lategame. Zerg has the advantage of insta-remax in the lategame once both sides have huge banks. Protoss doesn't care about this since the Skytoss+Templar deathball can beat the shit out of Zerg several times over, but insta-remax works very well against Terran. Similarly, Protoss has mothership recall and nexus recall to teleport their big slow deathball around but Terran's deathball doesn't and is even slower because Tanks+Libs need to siege up. And most importantly, a lategame Protoss army exploits the lack of Zerg AA while a lategame Terran army is ground-based. It's not like Terran never beats Zerg or Zerg never beats Protoss, but the fact that lategame favors certain races over others is pretty obvious. Terrans with gosu ghost micro can land snipes and trade cost efficiently. Zergs with great positioning can abduct and pick off expensive tech units. And so on. But broadly speaking, lategame goes P > Z > T That's funny, how using ability when T does it become "gosu micro", but not when it's abduct or storm while it's exactly the same lol. Seen soO streaming and lost vs terran mass ghost on late game, he said "Terran imba". Late game is completly winnable for T vs Z right now. ......... Did you even read my post? You are complaining that I am somehow bashing storm/abduct because I used synonymous adjectives? Terrans with gosu ghost micro can land snipes and trade cost efficiently. Zergs with great positioning can abduct and pick off expensive tech units.
I used the term "great positioning" to describe abduct usage, because I didn't want to repeat myself and use "gosu micro" twice. Quibble over semantics if you like, but "great positioning" is not an insult and I wasn't bashing abduct/storm. And last I checked, neither abduct nor storm have a 1.43 second delay between click and cast, so no it's not exactly the same at all. You said soO bitches about Terran. I've seen Stats bitch about Zerg and Inno bitch about Protoss. Progamers are people too, they get frustrated like anyone else. And you say that lategame TvZ is winnable for Terran...... It's not like Terran never beats Zerg is what I said. So basically, you complained about two things I never said, and then repeated what I said. Seriously man, at least read my post before you bash it. He's not arguing with you. He's just interjecting his own point: that ANY zerg can abduct well, whereas it truly takes "Gosu-level" micro for a Terran to use the Snipe ability effectively. I'm just joking about Terran players so arrogant. When they split 2 units "gosu godlike micro", when they use an ability "trutly gosu micro". It's so ridiculous, diamond player knows how to use ghosts, it's just pressing a touch lol. It's not harder than using any ability, but yeah when T suddently start using a caster once in a blue moon it's "gosu micro", while Z/P using regulary a set of 2-3 casters is "Noob A move".
I literally complimented Zerg viper micro, then explained why it was a compliment, and you are still whining about something I never said.
Good god.
EDIT: I misunderstood this, sorry about that.
|
On January 24 2018 13:47 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 12:57 SnowfaLL wrote:On January 24 2018 10:47 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 09:32 youngjiddle wrote:On January 24 2018 07:36 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 07:09 youngjiddle wrote:On January 24 2018 03:39 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 03:09 Freeborn wrote:On January 24 2018 02:47 Elentos wrote:On January 24 2018 02:27 Freeborn wrote:
Does anyone have any examples of progames where the stalkers are too strong? Or where protosses defeat good terran players easily?
I'm pretty sure this stalker nerf is hyped by terran whining again. Terran is not underperforming as far as I can tell.
It rather looks like terran is still a bit too strong versus zerg and zerg is now very strong versus protoss.
While terrans can still win with pure bio mine and drops versus protoss without even using ravens or ghosts... It's not stalkers in a vacuum, it's a combination of buffed stalkers, buffed chargelots, nerfed mine drops etc. Even just the overall match-up winrates aside, the top Terrans themselves all have poor winrates against Protoss on the new patch in tournament matches. The Korean TvP meta at the moment involves lots of 2-base all-ins. Definite Examples and sources please? PvT is currently at 59% http://aligulac.com/periods/207/?page=1For specific games, check any one of these: Classic v TThen compare the PvT winrates for top Protoss players (Classic, Stats, herO, etc) and TvP winrates for top Terrans (Inno, Maru, TY, etc). The Protoss players all have ~20% higher winrates on average. lul, buddy linking a aligulac period that is only a week in. a few weeks ago I saw it was like 57%, then evened out to 51%, haha. looking at past ones we have 51%, 52%, 52% ... If you want a more detailed collection of stats: PvT for Nov/Dec was at 53%. You left out the first December period at 55%, and before that was 56%. Summing the last and current period (January games till now) gives us 363/667 games, or 54%. Currently, of course, PvT is at 59%. PvT for top pros (games and series):
Stats: 81% and 92% Classic: 80% and 90% herO: 78% and 88% sOs: 75% and 83% Zest: 70% and 77% TvP for top pros (games and series):
aLive: 57% and 66% Inno: 56% and 61% Maru: 52% and 61% Gumiho: 50% and 51% TY: 27% and 18% Obviously, this data is not perfect. If PvT was balanced we would expect some players to have advantages and others disadvantages. We would expect statistical noise randomly in favor of Protoss or Terran. A single top Protoss doing well or a single period favoring Protoss is perfectly normal for a balanced matchup. But when all the periods, all the pros, and all the data are pointing towards Protoss > Terran across the board, as they are right now, that's an indication that something is wrong with the matchup. no, you're being biased. LMFAO how can you put up """""""""stats"""""""" like "vs top pros or series" when for example, stats has an 85.71% winrate with only 14 games played. LMFAO, 14 games confirmed proper statistics to use in an arguement. These six series where he played bunny, keen, and cure? lmfao. Ah, it's youngjiddle again isn't it? Checks nameYep, thought so. No point in discussing anything here then. Hope you enjoy the stalker nerf. Don't know where you are getting your numbers from besides cherrypicking, cause just looking at INnovation alone, hes at 65% WR vP - http://aligulac.com/players/48-INnoVation/If you go just from Dec 2017, hes at 59% http://aligulac.com/players/48/results/?after=2017-12-01&before=&event=&race=p&country=all&bestof=all&offline=both&game=all&wcs_season=&wcs_tier=&op=TY had similar winrates when i checked earlier today. Basically, all it proves is that Classic is on fire right now (take Classic away, and Innovation is over 90% WR!), and all top terrans still beat protoss pretty handily. Take away Neeb in smaller tournaments from aligac and see Protoss winrates drop to under 50% vT. You can't seriously use this as the source for your balance whine? Terran has been the dominate race for 7 years now, it was nice to have a patch that was getting closer to being fair.. but 3 weeks of "slightly" favorable protoss results end up with the terran crybabies threatening to quit the game and pestering blizzard to make changes already.. yet when Protoss was 42% WR vs Terran last year, blizzard said "We'll wait 6 months to see how the balance plays out".. this game's bias is LOL-worthy. "Terran has been the dominate race for 7 years now......"Terran has certainly had periods of dominance like GomTvT but to ignore BL/Infestor, the Blink era, PvProleague, etc, is pure biased bullshit. The only thing LOL-worthy here is your victim complex and hypocrisy. For the pros, I was using post-4.0 as the date, and if you bothered reading my post instead of wallowing in self-pity you'd see that I said myself that the data was flawed–so we have to aggregate all the sources, from aligulac in general to specific tournaments and then specific players. In all cases Protoss is at the very least 50%+ and in some cases far beyond that, which indicates that there's systemic Protoss-favored imbalance in the matchup. But go on, keep crying about crybabies. You cite Terrans clinging to imbalance in their favor after 3.8 while doing the exact same thing ater 4.0. The irony is hilarious.
Lol what a pleasant person to try and have a balance discussion with.. I think you should watch rotti's clip about Terran whiners, fits you to a T. Typical terran. It's impossible to discuss anything unbiased in this thread so I'll just keep enjoying the crying of protoss having a few percent positive in the matchup for the first time in years.. the yummy tears of avilo fans.
|
On January 24 2018 14:59 SnowfaLL wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 13:47 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 12:57 SnowfaLL wrote:On January 24 2018 10:47 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 09:32 youngjiddle wrote:On January 24 2018 07:36 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 07:09 youngjiddle wrote:On January 24 2018 03:39 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 03:09 Freeborn wrote:On January 24 2018 02:47 Elentos wrote:
[quote]
It's not stalkers in a vacuum, it's a combination of buffed stalkers, buffed chargelots, nerfed mine drops etc. Even just the overall match-up winrates aside, the top Terrans themselves all have poor winrates against Protoss on the new patch in tournament matches. The Korean TvP meta at the moment involves lots of 2-base all-ins. Definite Examples and sources please? PvT is currently at 59% http://aligulac.com/periods/207/?page=1For specific games, check any one of these: Classic v TThen compare the PvT winrates for top Protoss players (Classic, Stats, herO, etc) and TvP winrates for top Terrans (Inno, Maru, TY, etc). The Protoss players all have ~20% higher winrates on average. lul, buddy linking a aligulac period that is only a week in. a few weeks ago I saw it was like 57%, then evened out to 51%, haha. looking at past ones we have 51%, 52%, 52% ... If you want a more detailed collection of stats: PvT for Nov/Dec was at 53%. You left out the first December period at 55%, and before that was 56%. Summing the last and current period (January games till now) gives us 363/667 games, or 54%. Currently, of course, PvT is at 59%. PvT for top pros (games and series):
Stats: 81% and 92% Classic: 80% and 90% herO: 78% and 88% sOs: 75% and 83% Zest: 70% and 77% TvP for top pros (games and series):
aLive: 57% and 66% Inno: 56% and 61% Maru: 52% and 61% Gumiho: 50% and 51% TY: 27% and 18% Obviously, this data is not perfect. If PvT was balanced we would expect some players to have advantages and others disadvantages. We would expect statistical noise randomly in favor of Protoss or Terran. A single top Protoss doing well or a single period favoring Protoss is perfectly normal for a balanced matchup. But when all the periods, all the pros, and all the data are pointing towards Protoss > Terran across the board, as they are right now, that's an indication that something is wrong with the matchup. no, you're being biased. LMFAO how can you put up """""""""stats"""""""" like "vs top pros or series" when for example, stats has an 85.71% winrate with only 14 games played. LMFAO, 14 games confirmed proper statistics to use in an arguement. These six series where he played bunny, keen, and cure? lmfao. Ah, it's youngjiddle again isn't it? Checks nameYep, thought so. No point in discussing anything here then. Hope you enjoy the stalker nerf. Don't know where you are getting your numbers from besides cherrypicking, cause just looking at INnovation alone, hes at 65% WR vP - http://aligulac.com/players/48-INnoVation/If you go just from Dec 2017, hes at 59% http://aligulac.com/players/48/results/?after=2017-12-01&before=&event=&race=p&country=all&bestof=all&offline=both&game=all&wcs_season=&wcs_tier=&op=TY had similar winrates when i checked earlier today. Basically, all it proves is that Classic is on fire right now (take Classic away, and Innovation is over 90% WR!), and all top terrans still beat protoss pretty handily. Take away Neeb in smaller tournaments from aligac and see Protoss winrates drop to under 50% vT. You can't seriously use this as the source for your balance whine? Terran has been the dominate race for 7 years now, it was nice to have a patch that was getting closer to being fair.. but 3 weeks of "slightly" favorable protoss results end up with the terran crybabies threatening to quit the game and pestering blizzard to make changes already.. yet when Protoss was 42% WR vs Terran last year, blizzard said "We'll wait 6 months to see how the balance plays out".. this game's bias is LOL-worthy. "Terran has been the dominate race for 7 years now......"Terran has certainly had periods of dominance like GomTvT but to ignore BL/Infestor, the Blink era, PvProleague, etc, is pure biased bullshit. The only thing LOL-worthy here is your victim complex and hypocrisy. For the pros, I was using post-4.0 as the date, and if you bothered reading my post instead of wallowing in self-pity you'd see that I said myself that the data was flawed–so we have to aggregate all the sources, from aligulac in general to specific tournaments and then specific players. In all cases Protoss is at the very least 50%+ and in some cases far beyond that, which indicates that there's systemic Protoss-favored imbalance in the matchup. But go on, keep crying about crybabies. You cite Terrans clinging to imbalance in their favor after 3.8 while doing the exact same thing ater 4.0. The irony is hilarious. Lol what a pleasant person to try and have a balance discussion with.. I think you should watch rotti's clip about Terran whiners, fits you to a T. Typical terran. It's impossible to discuss anything unbiased in this thread so I'll just keep enjoying the crying of protoss having a few percent positive in the matchup for the first time in years.. the yummy tears of avilo fans.
I loved Rotti's clip. It's dead on. There are a ton of Terran whiners who blame imbalance for their own ladder failings. Me though, I'm so "typical" that I don't even main Terran. Crazy, isn't it? But, but, but......I don't agree with you so I must be a stereotypical whiny Terran, right? Guess again.
I'm happy to have a pleasant conversation with anyone that doesn't join the conversation with a mountain of salty hypocrisy. If you just left off the last paragraph in your OP, then you would have gotten a perfectly civil response. A shame, since you even had some solid points about statistics. But nope, gotta bitch about Terrans.
I too love avilo's yummy tears. Have you seen the incontrol/avilo clip? It's great.
|
On January 24 2018 14:45 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 09:16 KR_4EVR wrote:On January 24 2018 08:03 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 07:54 Tyrhanius wrote:On January 24 2018 05:44 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 04:54 Geo.Rion wrote:On January 24 2018 03:51 washikie wrote:On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad. The same way Terran deals with Zerg and Protoss late game, kill them before they get there. It's the answer for Terran Zerg have always said was totally fine so why can't it work for zerg? You re suggestin Terran cant beat zerg lategame? splitmap scenarios favor Terrans very heavily, granted, Zerg can fight back, unlike zvP, but mass ghost and lots of fortified positions is definitely +EV for Terrans. And as far as i can tell, terrans can win late-lategame even without those, albeit less likely Lategame TvZ favors Zerg just like lategame PvZ favors Protoss. Therefore, the burden is on Zerg to kill Protoss before lategame just like the burden is on Terran to kill Zerg before lategame. Zerg has the advantage of insta-remax in the lategame once both sides have huge banks. Protoss doesn't care about this since the Skytoss+Templar deathball can beat the shit out of Zerg several times over, but insta-remax works very well against Terran. Similarly, Protoss has mothership recall and nexus recall to teleport their big slow deathball around but Terran's deathball doesn't and is even slower because Tanks+Libs need to siege up. And most importantly, a lategame Protoss army exploits the lack of Zerg AA while a lategame Terran army is ground-based. It's not like Terran never beats Zerg or Zerg never beats Protoss, but the fact that lategame favors certain races over others is pretty obvious. Terrans with gosu ghost micro can land snipes and trade cost efficiently. Zergs with great positioning can abduct and pick off expensive tech units. And so on. But broadly speaking, lategame goes P > Z > T That's funny, how using ability when T does it become "gosu micro", but not when it's abduct or storm while it's exactly the same lol. Seen soO streaming and lost vs terran mass ghost on late game, he said "Terran imba". Late game is completly winnable for T vs Z right now. ......... Did you even read my post? You are complaining that I am somehow bashing storm/abduct because I used synonymous adjectives? Terrans with gosu ghost micro can land snipes and trade cost efficiently. Zergs with great positioning can abduct and pick off expensive tech units.
I used the term "great positioning" to describe abduct usage, because I didn't want to repeat myself and use "gosu micro" twice. Quibble over semantics if you like, but "great positioning" is not an insult and I wasn't bashing abduct/storm. And last I checked, neither abduct nor storm have a 1.43 second delay between click and cast, so no it's not exactly the same at all. You said soO bitches about Terran. I've seen Stats bitch about Zerg and Inno bitch about Protoss. Progamers are people too, they get frustrated like anyone else. And you say that lategame TvZ is winnable for Terran...... It's not like Terran never beats Zerg is what I said. So basically, you complained about two things I never said, and then repeated what I said. Seriously man, at least read my post before you bash it. He's not arguing with you. He's just interjecting his own point: that ANY zerg can abduct well, whereas it truly takes "Gosu-level" micro for a Terran to use the Snipe ability effectively. I'm just joking about Terran players so arrogant. When they split 2 units "gosu godlike micro", when they use an ability "trutly gosu micro". It's so ridiculous, diamond player knows how to use ghosts, it's just pressing a touch lol. It's not harder than using any ability, but yeah when T suddently start using a caster once in a blue moon it's "gosu micro", while Z/P using regulary a set of 2-3 casters is "Noob A move".
Because Terran bio is so fragile compared to roach/hydra that usually accompany vipers; or the charglot/archons that accompany high templar. Because Terran units (widow mines and siege tanks) do friendly fire when not controlled properly.
Enjoy watching ZvZ, ZvP, and PvP 90% of the time you tune into SC2 streams. Then wonder why viewership dwindles when 1/3 of the player base don't have enough players to emulate/cheer/whatever on streams.
|
On January 24 2018 14:59 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 14:45 Tyrhanius wrote:On January 24 2018 09:16 KR_4EVR wrote:On January 24 2018 08:03 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 07:54 Tyrhanius wrote:On January 24 2018 05:44 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 04:54 Geo.Rion wrote:On January 24 2018 03:51 washikie wrote:On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad. The same way Terran deals with Zerg and Protoss late game, kill them before they get there. It's the answer for Terran Zerg have always said was totally fine so why can't it work for zerg? You re suggestin Terran cant beat zerg lategame? splitmap scenarios favor Terrans very heavily, granted, Zerg can fight back, unlike zvP, but mass ghost and lots of fortified positions is definitely +EV for Terrans. And as far as i can tell, terrans can win late-lategame even without those, albeit less likely Lategame TvZ favors Zerg just like lategame PvZ favors Protoss. Therefore, the burden is on Zerg to kill Protoss before lategame just like the burden is on Terran to kill Zerg before lategame. Zerg has the advantage of insta-remax in the lategame once both sides have huge banks. Protoss doesn't care about this since the Skytoss+Templar deathball can beat the shit out of Zerg several times over, but insta-remax works very well against Terran. Similarly, Protoss has mothership recall and nexus recall to teleport their big slow deathball around but Terran's deathball doesn't and is even slower because Tanks+Libs need to siege up. And most importantly, a lategame Protoss army exploits the lack of Zerg AA while a lategame Terran army is ground-based. It's not like Terran never beats Zerg or Zerg never beats Protoss, but the fact that lategame favors certain races over others is pretty obvious. Terrans with gosu ghost micro can land snipes and trade cost efficiently. Zergs with great positioning can abduct and pick off expensive tech units. And so on. But broadly speaking, lategame goes P > Z > T That's funny, how using ability when T does it become "gosu micro", but not when it's abduct or storm while it's exactly the same lol. Seen soO streaming and lost vs terran mass ghost on late game, he said "Terran imba". Late game is completly winnable for T vs Z right now. ......... Did you even read my post? You are complaining that I am somehow bashing storm/abduct because I used synonymous adjectives? Terrans with gosu ghost micro can land snipes and trade cost efficiently. Zergs with great positioning can abduct and pick off expensive tech units.
I used the term "great positioning" to describe abduct usage, because I didn't want to repeat myself and use "gosu micro" twice. Quibble over semantics if you like, but "great positioning" is not an insult and I wasn't bashing abduct/storm. And last I checked, neither abduct nor storm have a 1.43 second delay between click and cast, so no it's not exactly the same at all. You said soO bitches about Terran. I've seen Stats bitch about Zerg and Inno bitch about Protoss. Progamers are people too, they get frustrated like anyone else. And you say that lategame TvZ is winnable for Terran...... It's not like Terran never beats Zerg is what I said. So basically, you complained about two things I never said, and then repeated what I said. Seriously man, at least read my post before you bash it. He's not arguing with you. He's just interjecting his own point: that ANY zerg can abduct well, whereas it truly takes "Gosu-level" micro for a Terran to use the Snipe ability effectively. I'm just joking about Terran players so arrogant. When they split 2 units "gosu godlike micro", when they use an ability "trutly gosu micro". It's so ridiculous, diamond player knows how to use ghosts, it's just pressing a touch lol. It's not harder than using any ability, but yeah when T suddently start using a caster once in a blue moon it's "gosu micro", while Z/P using regulary a set of 2-3 casters is "Noob A move". I literally complimented Zerg viper micro, then explained why it was a compliment, and you are still whining about something I never said. Good god.
Tyrhanius is still not arguing with you, pvsnp. The things said by Tyrhanius are additions from another person saying basically the same thing. You identified the "same thing" but you still got defensive. Not everyone is youngjiddle. Relax and see that there are people that aren't against you.
|
On January 24 2018 15:43 Drfilip wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 14:59 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 14:45 Tyrhanius wrote:On January 24 2018 09:16 KR_4EVR wrote:On January 24 2018 08:03 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 07:54 Tyrhanius wrote:On January 24 2018 05:44 pvsnp wrote:On January 24 2018 04:54 Geo.Rion wrote:On January 24 2018 03:51 washikie wrote:On January 23 2018 23:50 Geo.Rion wrote:
Honest to god, non-trolling question:
How the hell do you deal with Protoss lategame as zerg? If anything, hydras were somewhat underpowered against protoss lategame, and they get a nerf and no change to Skytoss, or storms or archons, or any units that are givin Z problems.
It feels like zerg is on the clock against Protoss, and this change does nothing but reinforce that trend. I dont know how the win% are in the MU, what i do know is that Protoss lategame has no answers from the zerg, besides getting ridiculously ahead in the midgame.
Dont have as much time as i used to for watching VODs, but i m struggling to find lategame ZVP wins nowadays, i feel the dynamic of the MU is really bad. The same way Terran deals with Zerg and Protoss late game, kill them before they get there. It's the answer for Terran Zerg have always said was totally fine so why can't it work for zerg? You re suggestin Terran cant beat zerg lategame? splitmap scenarios favor Terrans very heavily, granted, Zerg can fight back, unlike zvP, but mass ghost and lots of fortified positions is definitely +EV for Terrans. And as far as i can tell, terrans can win late-lategame even without those, albeit less likely Lategame TvZ favors Zerg just like lategame PvZ favors Protoss. Therefore, the burden is on Zerg to kill Protoss before lategame just like the burden is on Terran to kill Zerg before lategame. Zerg has the advantage of insta-remax in the lategame once both sides have huge banks. Protoss doesn't care about this since the Skytoss+Templar deathball can beat the shit out of Zerg several times over, but insta-remax works very well against Terran. Similarly, Protoss has mothership recall and nexus recall to teleport their big slow deathball around but Terran's deathball doesn't and is even slower because Tanks+Libs need to siege up. And most importantly, a lategame Protoss army exploits the lack of Zerg AA while a lategame Terran army is ground-based. It's not like Terran never beats Zerg or Zerg never beats Protoss, but the fact that lategame favors certain races over others is pretty obvious. Terrans with gosu ghost micro can land snipes and trade cost efficiently. Zergs with great positioning can abduct and pick off expensive tech units. And so on. But broadly speaking, lategame goes P > Z > T That's funny, how using ability when T does it become "gosu micro", but not when it's abduct or storm while it's exactly the same lol. Seen soO streaming and lost vs terran mass ghost on late game, he said "Terran imba". Late game is completly winnable for T vs Z right now. ......... Did you even read my post? You are complaining that I am somehow bashing storm/abduct because I used synonymous adjectives? Terrans with gosu ghost micro can land snipes and trade cost efficiently. Zergs with great positioning can abduct and pick off expensive tech units.
I used the term "great positioning" to describe abduct usage, because I didn't want to repeat myself and use "gosu micro" twice. Quibble over semantics if you like, but "great positioning" is not an insult and I wasn't bashing abduct/storm. And last I checked, neither abduct nor storm have a 1.43 second delay between click and cast, so no it's not exactly the same at all. You said soO bitches about Terran. I've seen Stats bitch about Zerg and Inno bitch about Protoss. Progamers are people too, they get frustrated like anyone else. And you say that lategame TvZ is winnable for Terran...... It's not like Terran never beats Zerg is what I said. So basically, you complained about two things I never said, and then repeated what I said. Seriously man, at least read my post before you bash it. He's not arguing with you. He's just interjecting his own point: that ANY zerg can abduct well, whereas it truly takes "Gosu-level" micro for a Terran to use the Snipe ability effectively. I'm just joking about Terran players so arrogant. When they split 2 units "gosu godlike micro", when they use an ability "trutly gosu micro". It's so ridiculous, diamond player knows how to use ghosts, it's just pressing a touch lol. It's not harder than using any ability, but yeah when T suddently start using a caster once in a blue moon it's "gosu micro", while Z/P using regulary a set of 2-3 casters is "Noob A move". I literally complimented Zerg viper micro, then explained why it was a compliment, and you are still whining about something I never said. Good god. Tyrhanius is still not arguing with you, pvsnp. The things said by Tyrhanius are additions from another person saying basically the same thing. You identified the "same thing" but you still got defensive. Not everyone is youngjiddle. Relax and see that there are people that aren't against you.
Oh lol, stupid me. I must've misread/misunderstood.
Sorry about that, just got locked into defensive mode and assumed he meant it in a whiny way. I'm a dumbass.
Thanks for snapping me out of it, man. Appreciate it.
|
When is this patch going live?
|
On January 24 2018 19:16 kajtarp wrote:
When is this patch going live?
While I haven't found a particular date, I guess it will be within 1-2 weeks, if testing goes smoothly.
|
I don't know why you guys are still arguing about win rates.
It doesn't matter if PvT win rate is 40% or 60%. When 50% of the played games are some type of 2/3 base all-in with pulling the boys, the matchup is kinda flawed.
|
Darn, repair drone was my favourite spell, I really like to have my army always healed up and not relying on accompanying SCVs and steady mineral and gas income to achieve it.
Well, at least I still have my zerg with constant heal on every single thing  .
On January 23 2018 21:32 _Epi_ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 18:37 Mithriel wrote:
I actually made Ravens for the repair drone and matrix, shame to lose the repair and get a turret.
Im no pro by any means, but felt like a repair for my mech army was useful and I dislike the turret in general. Mee too, I used the repair drone frequently and it was for me a big thing using the raven. Mech had a real lategame with the repair drone, it was not used enough to really point out being bad or not useful
Glad I'm not the only one. Sometimes new stuff takes a really long time to catch on, even with the pros. It's a shame blizz weren't willing to give this ability the chance to prove its worth.
|
On January 24 2018 22:05 MrFreeman wrote:Darn, repair drone was my favourite spell, I really like to have my army always healed up and not relying on accompanying SCVs and steady mineral and gas income to achieve it. Well, at least I still have my zerg with constant heal on every single thing . Show nested quote +On January 23 2018 21:32 _Epi_ wrote:On January 23 2018 18:37 Mithriel wrote:
I actually made Ravens for the repair drone and matrix, shame to lose the repair and get a turret.
Im no pro by any means, but felt like a repair for my mech army was useful and I dislike the turret in general. Mee too, I used the repair drone frequently and it was for me a big thing using the raven. Mech had a real lategame with the repair drone, it was not used enough to really point out being bad or not useful Glad I'm not the only one. Sometimes new stuff takes a really long time to catch on, even with the pros. It's a shame blizz weren't willing to give this ability the chance to prove its worth.
You can build extra orbitals and use call down mules to repair your army anywhere on the map 
|
|
|
Thanks for pointing that out, had 29th in my head, but didn't want to commit on that 
|
Mines should have a 'Stop firing button' like ghost has one 'hold fire/weapons fire'.
|
On January 25 2018 16:24 engesser1 wrote:
Mines should have a 'Stop firing button' like ghost has one 'hold fire/weapons fire'.
That would be beyond broken. You would be unable to bait out mine shots with a single overseer/ling. It would be like those hold-fire-lurker traps except cheaper, expendable, and not tier 3. Plus mutas and pheonixes would be done for
|
On January 25 2018 16:39 Fango wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2018 16:24 engesser1 wrote:
Mines should have a 'Stop firing button' like ghost has one 'hold fire/weapons fire'. That would be beyond broken. You would be unable to bait out mine shots with a single overseer/ling. It would be like those hold-fire-lurker traps except cheaper, expendable, and not tier 3. Plus mutas and pheonixes would be done for
sweeeeeeet.
|
I'm just joking about Terran players so arrogant.
Enjoy watching ZvZ, ZvP, and PvP 90% of the time you tune into SC2 streams. Then wonder why viewership dwindles when 1/3 of the player base don't have enough players to emulate/cheer/whatever on streams.
This is my main concern, there are hardly any terrans advancing in tournaments anymore except maybe Innovation. Balance is one thing, but it is just a shame we see less and less top terrans.
|
On January 25 2018 19:20 Gekk02 wrote:Show nested quote +
Enjoy watching ZvZ, ZvP, and PvP 90% of the time you tune into SC2 streams. Then wonder why viewership dwindles when 1/3 of the player base don't have enough players to emulate/cheer/whatever on streams.
This is my main concern, there are hardly any terrans advancing in tournaments anymore except maybe Innovation. Balance is one thing, but it is just a shame we see less and less top terrans.
As someone who vividly remembers the GomTvT era and what people were saying that time,
Maybe Terran players are just worse?
|
On January 25 2018 21:14 WaesumNinja wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2018 19:20 Gekk02 wrote:
Enjoy watching ZvZ, ZvP, and PvP 90% of the time you tune into SC2 streams. Then wonder why viewership dwindles when 1/3 of the player base don't have enough players to emulate/cheer/whatever on streams.
This is my main concern, there are hardly any terrans advancing in tournaments anymore except maybe Innovation. Balance is one thing, but it is just a shame we see less and less top terrans. As someone who vividly remembers the GomTvT era and what people were saying that time, Maybe Terran players are just worse?
yeah, i also remember that time.
Terran players were just so talented that 15/16 of the bracket happened to be Terrans.
It was mostly just happenstance, also due to the campaign being terran only which resulted in many more pros chosing terrans
|
The changes to stalkers seem fair to me, they're still a good unit but not as extremely dominant in the early game as before. Honestly, the stalker pressure and all ins could just so easily shave off so many marines if you made even a tiny mistake, and throughout the midgame the simple gateway army seemed really strong. Trap did some zealot phoenix style yesterday that also worked really well and didn't use many stalkers so in PvT I do really think this change seems fair. That'd realistically also be the only real change in this match up, as ravens just die to high templars and its not a huge change. It could be that protoss would be really weak now but I think this is simply fine in terms of balance.
The raven seems really good now. I'm so excited to be using this unit against zerg. I know the auto turret harass used to be annoying, but having the auto turret makes the raven somewhat consistently useful and allows for raven openers. In the lategame, that anti armor missile seems great and probably has great synergy with bio. It could be the answer to ultras and broodlords and make Terran be somewhat more competitive in lategame against zerg and thus make bio more viable.
I can see the Hydra change being a fine change, as zerg is actually quite dominant in the PvT match up. It's not too bad, it just makes the aggressive stuff come out a bit later. I wouldn't know if this ends up being a bad or a good change to be honest, I can see both changes.
Next big design patch should probably focus on lategame. With the new ravens, TvZ lategame might not need much attention, but both PvT and PvZ lategame is just nonsense right now. Protoss lategame is just incredibly suppressive, and Terrans are dealing with it by not even considering lategame at all; most terran players play really aggressively and often don't really think about upgrades much, we even saw bunny pull the boys in a position where he was sorta even on supply and army. As others have pointed out, ZvP lategame is also really hard. Protoss just gets this insane deathball so Zerg is forced to close out the game early. If it does go lategame you get this really stale style with some broodlord infestor deathball that's just not trying to get stuff done.
I personally hope they take a serious look at Protoss lategame. They have so many strengths in the lategame, it's off the charts really. Meanwhile, Terran has very little options in the lategame which just doesn't feel much fun. At some point the protoss deathball becomes almost unkillable. Also, I think the zerg lategame could use some attention. The broodlord style just seems to lead to split map situations with some insane air deathball. Maybe they could get more speed/health/attack damage in favor of spawning fewer broodlings; broodlings just make any ground based army fail to reach the broods which forces stale and boring (imo) air deathball vs air deathball games.
|
On January 25 2018 21:14 WaesumNinja wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2018 19:20 Gekk02 wrote:
Enjoy watching ZvZ, ZvP, and PvP 90% of the time you tune into SC2 streams. Then wonder why viewership dwindles when 1/3 of the player base don't have enough players to emulate/cheer/whatever on streams.
This is my main concern, there are hardly any terrans advancing in tournaments anymore except maybe Innovation. Balance is one thing, but it is just a shame we see less and less top terrans. As someone who vividly remembers the GomTvT era and what people were saying that time, Maybe Terran players are just worse?
haha during BL/Infestor era Zerg players said Zerg players are just better too and of course during the blink era protoss players were much better.
|
On January 25 2018 21:14 WaesumNinja wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2018 19:20 Gekk02 wrote:
Enjoy watching ZvZ, ZvP, and PvP 90% of the time you tune into SC2 streams. Then wonder why viewership dwindles when 1/3 of the player base don't have enough players to emulate/cheer/whatever on streams.
This is my main concern, there are hardly any terrans advancing in tournaments anymore except maybe Innovation. Balance is one thing, but it is just a shame we see less and less top terrans. As someone who vividly remembers the GomTvT era and what people were saying that time, Maybe Terran players are just worse?
How can you say that with a straight face
|
On January 25 2018 22:25 Charoisaur wrote:
haha during BL/Infestor era Zerg players said Zerg players are just better too and of course during the blink era protoss players were much better.
Yes they did, but in case you missed it, they were doing that only as a snarky reference to what Terrans had been saying.
|
If you look at objectively the top 5 Terran has always been better than the top 5 Protoss and top 5 Zerg player skill wise. It is nothing strange about this, if you have a very small sample of top players it very unlikely that their skill level would be exactly even.
Unfortunately, Blizzard has always tried to make the balance so the top Protoss and Zerg player can win just as much (since it looks better from an e-sport perspective). If the game was actually balanced Terran would win more at the very top level simply because Terran have better top players compared to the other races.
|
On January 25 2018 22:48 MockHamill wrote:
If you look at objectively the top 5 Terran has always been better than the top 5 Protoss and top 5 Zerg player skill wise. It is nothing strange about this, if you have a very small sample of top players it very unlikely that their skill level would be exactly even.
Unfortunately, Blizzard has always tried to make the balance so the top Protoss and Zerg player can win just as much (since it looks better from an e-sport perspective). If the game was actually balanced Terran would win more at the very top level simply becouse Terran have better top players compared to the other races.
I can't believe I'm still reading this. Just a few post after I mocked this disillusion people were having 5+ years ago someone posts it again.
|
On January 25 2018 22:48 MockHamill wrote:
If you look at objectively the top 5 Terran has always been better than the top 5 Protoss and top 5 Zerg player skill wise. It is nothing strange about this, if you have a very small sample of top players it very unlikely that their skill level would be exactly even.
Unfortunately, Blizzard has always tried to make the balance so the top Protoss and Zerg player can win just as much (since it looks better from an e-sport perspective). If the game was actually balanced Terran would win more at the very top level simply because Terran have better top players compared to the other races.
"objectively"
|
On January 25 2018 22:48 MockHamill wrote:
If you look at objectively the top 5 Terran has always been better than the top 5 Protoss and top 5 Zerg player skill wise. It is nothing strange about this, if you have a very small sample of top players it very unlikely that their skill level would be exactly even.
Unfortunately, Blizzard has always tried to make the balance so the top Protoss and Zerg player can win just as much (since it looks better from an e-sport perspective). If the game was actually balanced Terran would win more at the very top level simply because Terran have better top players compared to the other races.
I am not even saying this couldn't be true in theory, but you will have a hard time proving it
Also "actual balance" doesn't exist if you have an asymmetrical game with different races. Sc2 was through most of its lifespan very well balanced, balanced enough that you could win if you were the better player. People just loved to shit on David.
|
On January 25 2018 23:52 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2018 22:48 MockHamill wrote:
If you look at objectively the top 5 Terran has always been better than the top 5 Protoss and top 5 Zerg player skill wise. It is nothing strange about this, if you have a very small sample of top players it very unlikely that their skill level would be exactly even.
Unfortunately, Blizzard has always tried to make the balance so the top Protoss and Zerg player can win just as much (since it looks better from an e-sport perspective). If the game was actually balanced Terran would win more at the very top level simply because Terran have better top players compared to the other races.
I am not even saying this couldn't be true in theory, but you will have a hard time proving it Also "actual balance" doesn't exist if you have an asymmetrical game with different races. Sc2 was through most of its lifespan very well balanced, balanced enough that you could win if you were the better player. People just loved to shit on David.
Well has Protoss ever had a player as good as MVP or Innovation: Nope.
Has Zerg ever have a player as good as MVP or Innovation: Maybe Life but he turned out to be a cheater that killed off pro league so I do not think he counts.
If you look at the actual gameplay at the very highest level almost all beautiful and really impressive moves belongs to Terran players. Zerg and Protoss rarely do something truly impressive even if they are really good players, of course.
|
You just state opinions and nothing more. It's also funny you mention Mvp when he won most of his titles in an arguably terran favored time.
If you look at the actual gameplay at the very highest level almost all beautiful and really impressive moves belongs to Terran players. Zerg and Protoss rarely do something truly impressive even if they are really good players, of course.
This only shows your bias towards certain things while neglecting everything else. Starcraft is a game with many different tasks and skills to master and while it is probably fair to say that not every race has the exact same priorities there, every race can still bring up players with a wide difference in styles.
Personally i think the notion that only terran players do impressive things is laughable.
|
On January 26 2018 00:05 MockHamill wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2018 23:52 The_Red_Viper wrote:On January 25 2018 22:48 MockHamill wrote:
If you look at objectively the top 5 Terran has always been better than the top 5 Protoss and top 5 Zerg player skill wise. It is nothing strange about this, if you have a very small sample of top players it very unlikely that their skill level would be exactly even.
Unfortunately, Blizzard has always tried to make the balance so the top Protoss and Zerg player can win just as much (since it looks better from an e-sport perspective). If the game was actually balanced Terran would win more at the very top level simply because Terran have better top players compared to the other races.
I am not even saying this couldn't be true in theory, but you will have a hard time proving it Also "actual balance" doesn't exist if you have an asymmetrical game with different races. Sc2 was through most of its lifespan very well balanced, balanced enough that you could win if you were the better player. People just loved to shit on David. Well has Protoss ever had a player as good as MVP or Innovation: Nope. Has Zerg ever have a player as good as MVP or Innovation: Maybe Life but he turned out to be a cheater that killed off pro league so I do not think he counts. If you look at the actual gameplay at the very highest level almost all beautiful and really impressive moves belongs to Terran players. Zerg and Protoss rarely do something truly impressive even if they are really good players, of course.
Gameplay is subjective, and what I call beautiful and impressive you might not call beautiful and impressive or vice versa.
|
On January 26 2018 00:05 MockHamill wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2018 23:52 The_Red_Viper wrote:On January 25 2018 22:48 MockHamill wrote:
If you look at objectively the top 5 Terran has always been better than the top 5 Protoss and top 5 Zerg player skill wise. It is nothing strange about this, if you have a very small sample of top players it very unlikely that their skill level would be exactly even.
Unfortunately, Blizzard has always tried to make the balance so the top Protoss and Zerg player can win just as much (since it looks better from an e-sport perspective). If the game was actually balanced Terran would win more at the very top level simply because Terran have better top players compared to the other races.
I am not even saying this couldn't be true in theory, but you will have a hard time proving it Also "actual balance" doesn't exist if you have an asymmetrical game with different races. Sc2 was through most of its lifespan very well balanced, balanced enough that you could win if you were the better player. People just loved to shit on David. Well has Protoss ever had a player as good as MVP or Innovation: Nope. Has Zerg ever have a player as good as MVP or Innovation: Maybe Life but he turned out to be a cheater that killed off pro league so I do not think he counts. If you look at the actual gameplay at the very highest level almost all beautiful and really impressive moves belongs to Terran players. Zerg and Protoss rarely do something truly impressive even if they are really good players, of course.
Point 1, subjectivity:
When I am thinking about beautiful moves, protoss play is dominant. When I think about impressive moves there are a lot of zerg and some protoss that I think of. My favourite day of GSL was March 12, 2014. An all protoss group. I had very low expectations since PvP was the most boring match up. The plays that day were very impressive. The micro was beautiful. The builds were deliberate.
Terran is the race I generally enjoy watching the most. Terran is also the race with the least amount of top notch games.
MockHamill, your opinions are not facts. Please stop writing as if they are! You wrote "objectively" but the complete sentence was subjective. Skill can be so many things and the things you value are not the same as the things I value.
Point 2, argumentation:
The way you argued that Life was not skilled at the game had nothing to do with his skill at the game. Life did not cheat to win games. He won the games without cheating. He did cheat, but his skill is unaffected by that.
What do you man by "good player"? INno has had up and downs, being great at times but good at others. He has even had times when he was close to second tier.
Looking at the highs:
NesTea was great in 2011.
The man that is called BossToss, MC, had an era of greatness.
Rain and Dear have both looked unstoppable.
Zest in the first half of 2016 was amazing.
Looking at consistency:
soO has been relevant more consistently than INnoVation. soO has performed pretty much all the time since HotS came out. INnoVation have not even qualified for code S more than 5 times in a row. That is as many as HuK. PartinG managed to get to the round of 16 twice as much as that.
MVP had 4 years in the GSL. His code S streak was during 3 years. herO has had a shorter streak when counting number of code S qualifications, but that streak has been during 4 years.
Usually there is a correlation between the amount of practitioners and who are the best. Looking at GSL statistics over race distribution we see that Terran has been the most common race in the early days. MVP and INnoVation are a product of this.
I used GSL statistics because they were easily accessible.
|
On January 25 2018 22:48 MockHamill wrote:
If you look at objectively the top 5 Terran has always been better than the top 5 Protoss and top 5 Zerg player skill wise. It is nothing strange about this, if you have a very small sample of top players it very unlikely that their skill level would be exactly even.
Unfortunately, Blizzard has always tried to make the balance so the top Protoss and Zerg player can win just as much (since it looks better from an e-sport perspective). If the game was actually balanced Terran would win more at the very top level simply because Terran have better top players compared to the other races.
Just when you thought hallmark of quality stuff like this would unironically only be posted in the b.net forum.
|
In fact the most robust argument to support this claim would be to compare the Korean and foreign scenes. It's now very clear that blizzard balanced for (and from the results of) the very top of the scene, i.e the top of the Korean one.
I think everyone can agree on this.
So if we watch major korean tournaments wins (GSL, OSL, ..) over the years of SC2, that's nearly a perfect 1/1/1 repartition between races.
But if you watch the forein scene that's a whole different story. Most of the wins are Z, then P, and then, the disappearing terran race. ( with now only 1 top terran, Major, and one relevant, uthermy ). If only Blizard balanced for the foreign scene without watching the korean one, the game would be dramatically different. This could either support the upmonentioned argument of a better top-terran terran players pool, or support the argument of skill-based balance (i.e balance is not the same at different skills levels, and the top korean one was one step ahead the top foreigner one. ), or a mix of the two ( witch imo seems close the the reality for most of SC2 time ).
If we watch back the KR pros names during early SC2 now... they were in fact way way more good terrans than good toss or zergs (in toss, only MC seems good, the second best is like InCa, lol. No wonders why only MC won toss titles during this time ). Then we had more and more good zergs during WoL. Then the kespa fusion brings good players for all races... but most notably an protoss armada.
Now, after all the retirements, we have a very good Terran pool, a good Protoss one, but a weak zerg one (with, except SoO, very inconsistent players like Rogue, Dark, ..)
Meanwhile in ForeignLand we have an armada of (very) good zergs, 1 top toss (Neeb) and some good ones (Showtime, etc), and one top Terran. If only Blizzard balanced only the foreign scene, zerg would be f***ng hard nerfed to hell and Terran buffed a lot, so maybe foreign zergs should be merciful to koreans (terrans) =)
The second best argument to support this claim, while a bit troll-esque, is still an intrigant fact : mid-tier terrans switching to toss.... became the best tosses.Classic and Neeb ofc.
And to my knowing it's the only successful path of trans-racialism in SC2. (except Scarlett in Toss :D )
There are also frequents rumors about best-random-GM-player on korean server always being one of the top terrans offracing (well, even if we don't count Gumiho ) since MC.
|
On January 25 2018 22:42 WaesumNinja wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2018 22:25 Charoisaur wrote:
haha during BL/Infestor era Zerg players said Zerg players are just better too and of course during the blink era protoss players were much better.
Yes they did, but in case you missed it, they were doing that only as a snarky reference to what Terrans had been saying.
No, they did not. Bias isn't something that is exclusive to Terran players, so don't make a fool of yourself.
|
On January 26 2018 07:23 Creager wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2018 22:42 WaesumNinja wrote:On January 25 2018 22:25 Charoisaur wrote:
haha during BL/Infestor era Zerg players said Zerg players are just better too and of course during the blink era protoss players were much better.
Yes they did, but in case you missed it, they were doing that only as a snarky reference to what Terrans had been saying. No, they did not. Bias isn't something that is exclusive to Terran players, so don't make a fool of yourself.
Yeah, I don't know why people are still trying to discuss this nonsense.
It's stupid to say that Terrans are just better players, and equally stupid to say that about Protoss/Zerg. GomTvT had Terran apologists, BL/Infestor had Zerg apologists, and the Blink era had Protoss apologists. Every time one race is OP, there will be players who fight to keep the imbalance in their favor. It's been that way since 2010, it is still that way right now, and it will continue to be that way for as long as SC2 is still played.
Not rocket science.
|
I'll say that I do belive terran is the harder and more demanding race to play. If Inno or Maru had played protoss instead of terran, they would have dominated even harder than they did. That being said players have pushed the skill level of each race to remarkable heights regardless
The majority of legend players had their biggest successes when their race was favoured anyway. So comparing them is difficult. Has zerg had players that were as good as MVP or Inno? Probably. I was honestly more impressed by what ByuL and soO did in GSL, even though Inno beat both of them. And MVP will always be overrated
|
On January 26 2018 07:23 Creager wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2018 22:42 WaesumNinja wrote:On January 25 2018 22:25 Charoisaur wrote:
haha during BL/Infestor era Zerg players said Zerg players are just better too and of course during the blink era protoss players were much better.
Yes they did, but in case you missed it, they were doing that only as a snarky reference to what Terrans had been saying. No, they did not. Bias isn't something that is exclusive to Terran players, so don't make a fool of yourself.
If they used that specific phrasing then it's fairly guaranteed that they indeed did, yes.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On January 26 2018 08:28 Fango wrote:
I'll say that I do belive terran is the harder and more demanding race to play. If Inno or Maru had played protoss instead of terran, they would have dominated even harder than they did. That being said players have pushed the skill level of each race to remarkable heights regardless
The majority of legend players had their biggest successes when their race was favoured anyway. So comparing them is difficult. Has zerg had players that were as good as MVP or Inno? Probably. I was honestly more impressed by what ByuL and soO did in GSL, even though Inno beat both of them. And MVP will always be overrated
That's not true, as Protoss is too much different from Terran. It's the same as Flash and TErran in SC2...
|
so when is the 2018 season 1 starting?
|
On January 26 2018 17:27 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2018 08:28 Fango wrote:
I'll say that I do belive terran is the harder and more demanding race to play. If Inno or Maru had played protoss instead of terran, they would have dominated even harder than they did. That being said players have pushed the skill level of each race to remarkable heights regardless
The majority of legend players had their biggest successes when their race was favoured anyway. So comparing them is difficult. Has zerg had players that were as good as MVP or Inno? Probably. I was honestly more impressed by what ByuL and soO did in GSL, even though Inno beat both of them. And MVP will always be overrated That's not true, as Protoss is too much different from Terran. It's the same as Flash and TErran in SC2...
Protoss is different from terran yes. But the mechanical skills that Inno and Maru showed in HoTS were above anyone elses. If they applied the same skills and work ethic to a race which was more powerful (for most of the game's existance) I believe they would have had better results.
Flash would have had better success as protoss in sc2 than terran as well. He said he thought his sc2 protoss was better, as it had more similarity with terran in broodwar. The reason he didn't switch was because didn't want to outrage fans (or so I've heard).
|
On January 26 2018 18:00 Fango wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2018 17:27 deacon.frost wrote:On January 26 2018 08:28 Fango wrote:
I'll say that I do belive terran is the harder and more demanding race to play. If Inno or Maru had played protoss instead of terran, they would have dominated even harder than they did. That being said players have pushed the skill level of each race to remarkable heights regardless
The majority of legend players had their biggest successes when their race was favoured anyway. So comparing them is difficult. Has zerg had players that were as good as MVP or Inno? Probably. I was honestly more impressed by what ByuL and soO did in GSL, even though Inno beat both of them. And MVP will always be overrated That's not true, as Protoss is too much different from Terran. It's the same as Flash and TErran in SC2... Protoss is different from terran yes. But the mechanical skills that Inno and Maru showed in HoTS were above anyone elses.
High level objective analysis by the residual terran expert
|
Maru is one of the least well rounded high level players ever, so idk what gives you the impression that he could play another race at a higher level. What he does well he truly excels at, but what he does badly... Maru would have had better results in HotS if he hadn't constantly handicapped himself with terrible compositions (remember all those series he lost against Dear due to refusing to ever build vikings against colossi?).
|
On January 26 2018 17:47 nanaoei wrote:
so when is the 2018 season 1 starting?
it has started already, but it s still on the old patch
|
Even when Korean Terrans were dominating in the past, foreign Terrans were not overly dominant in the scene. Since then, other races have been buffed to the point where top Koreans are "balanced" while the foreign Terrans are close to extinct.
Fuck winrates. The game design is flawed when one race requires the top-most skill to be visible in the tournament scene while the other races are better represented throughout the skill-curve.
I am so over "balance only matters at the top-most level". If Overwatch is any indication, Playership = Viewership. If Viewership = eSports, then fuck the elitist attitude that balance only matters at the top-most level.
|
Widow mines are nearly useless now. I've played about 50 1v1s since the mine was nerfed, and there is no time where you want them.
1. Even when the unit is "invisible", you can see that it's there so you just back off.
2. Obviously when it goes off it becomes visible. Then it must be micro'd, just like every other Terran unit in existence.
3. The improvements to scan range means that ranged units literally never run into them when they have detection.
4. Anyone who is complaining about how awkward Disruptors are right now ought to try using widow mines for a day. They have a 2 second burrow time, as well as a 2 second delay before each one casts. This is why a pack of Mutas or Phoenix can kill nearly infinite widow mines.
5. Friendly fire. No tanking units. Wonderful.
6. Increased Observer + Overseer range while holding position makes them even less useful.
Why would any Terran build this unit? What is the situation where it's useful?
It is possible that you can catch a protoss off guard and get kills from a drop, but this is the very thing Blizzard wanted changed about it. Every other utility is now reduced to almost nothing, while this risky coin-flip is still there.
I did a Bio+widow mine all-in in TvP last night with 2 barracks and 2 factories cranking out mines. My opponent built Stalkers and Immortals. 12 widow mines built with my push. 1 kill from the mines. 0 from the rest of my units. After my push failed, I went home, built a missile turret at my front, and put 8 mines around it. The observer could see the mines on the front side and the back side of the turret farthest away from it. Stalker Immortal A-move for the win.
Much has been said about how mines are less useful in TvZ. Let me put the word out that TvP is just as bad. I was 25 supply up before my first attack. My opponent lost 1 stalker.
All this just to say: If the Widow Mine is going to remain visible while recharging, this unit needs a redesign. I have a few solutions that could be tried.
1. Reduce their supply, damage, cost, and size so that they can cover each other better.
2. Reduce the delay before they attack.
3. It may be that the only solution is to make them more like their predecessor, Spider Mines. If they were small, 1 supply, and blew up when they attacked there would be no more concern about these units being visible while recharging. This would be consistent with their identity as mines as well.
They cannot stay as they are.
|
On January 28 2018 09:02 Ransomstarcraft wrote:
I did a Bio+widow mine all-in in TvP last night with 2 barracks and 2 factories cranking out mines. My opponent built Stalkers
and Immortals. 12 widow mines built with my push. 1 kill from the mines. 0 from the rest of my units. After my
..
They cannot stay as they are.
pro tip: don't build 12, only 4-6, to kill chargelots.
There are these .. Byun? and Demuslim? funny names.. players. You can watch their streams. They can yolo very nicely with mine+bio. Try the balance patch, it seems tvp will be much better on the new patch.
|
no cyclone changes, uninstall
|
Ok so just wanted to chime in here and give my opinion on the current state of the game. Parasitic Bomb is insane. Blizzard either needs to nerf the damage severely like they did for the seeker missile on the raven or AT THE VERY LEAST blizzard needs to mark the infected unit in the unit selection box at the bottom of the screen so that a terran player can weed out the bad unit quickly by either landing it or moving it away from the rest of the army. By only marking the infected unit itself on the battlefield it makes it extremely difficult to recognize it during the heat of the moment to move it away in time before the rest of the terran air army evaporates. If we make the unit marked in the selection box, it will make things similar to how zerg players reacted vs irradiate with mutas in broodwar. The irradiated muta was always significantly lower in health compared to the others that were stacked thus making it easier to weed out the bad unit. I think this change needs to go into effect asap.
With the super fast damage rate and the current way that the marking of the spell works for parasitic bomb at this time, there is literally not enough time for a terran player to micro vs the spell. Vikings naturally clump up when sent to an area in sc2 unlike non-magic boxing units in broodwar so pre-splitting is not an option. There definitely needs to be a combination of a nerf for the spell. My full recommendation is to tone down the speed in which all the damage is dealt for parasitic bomb AND marking the infected unit in the unit selection box on the bottom of the screen. An entire viking army should not evaporate in under 4 seconds without terran having a way to micro against it.
Last thing to add incase anyone else was wondering.... No, buffing seeker missile to operate the same way as parasitic bomb is not a good answer. Sure, it would make it so both spellcasters are virtually equal in terms of strength, however, making seeker missiles with crazy damage will only create very boring non-interactive games where terran does nothing but camp and mass ravens(we had this in the past if you can recall and it was unhealthy for the game). The game needs to be as interactive as possible. Terrans need a way to interact vs parasitic bomb.
|
On January 28 2018 09:02 Ransomstarcraft wrote:
Widow mines are nearly useless now. I've played about 50 1v1s since the mine was nerfed, and there is no time where you want them.
1. Even when the unit is "invisible", you can see that it's there so you just back off.
2. Obviously when it goes off it becomes visible. Then it must be micro'd, just like every other Terran unit in existence.
3. The improvements to scan range means that ranged units literally never run into them when they have detection.
4. Anyone who is complaining about how awkward Disruptors are right now ought to try using widow mines for a day. They have a 2 second burrow time, as well as a 2 second delay before each one casts. This is why a pack of Mutas or Phoenix can kill nearly infinite widow mines.
5. Friendly fire. No tanking units. Wonderful.
6. Increased Observer + Overseer range while holding position makes them even less useful.
Why would any Terran build this unit? What is the situation where it's useful?
It is possible that you can catch a protoss off guard and get kills from a drop, but this is the very thing Blizzard wanted changed about it. Every other utility is now reduced to almost nothing, while this risky coin-flip is still there.
I did a Bio+widow mine all-in in TvP last night with 2 barracks and 2 factories cranking out mines. My opponent built Stalkers and Immortals. 12 widow mines built with my push. 1 kill from the mines. 0 from the rest of my units. After my push failed, I went home, built a missile turret at my front, and put 8 mines around it. The observer could see the mines on the front side and the back side of the turret farthest away from it. Stalker Immortal A-move for the win.
Much has been said about how mines are less useful in TvZ. Let me put the word out that TvP is just as bad. I was 25 supply up before my first attack. My opponent lost 1 stalker.
All this just to say: If the Widow Mine is going to remain visible while recharging, this unit needs a redesign. I have a few solutions that could be tried.
1. Reduce their supply, damage, cost, and size so that they can cover each other better.
2. Reduce the delay before they attack.
3. It may be that the only solution is to make them more like their predecessor, Spider Mines. If they were small, 1 supply, and blew up when they attacked there would be no more concern about these units being visible while recharging. This would be consistent with their identity as mines as well.
They cannot stay as they are.
Why on earth would you ever do that bio mine all in build, it sounds like a total shit build that never would have worked lol
|
On January 26 2018 07:44 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2018 07:23 Creager wrote:On January 25 2018 22:42 WaesumNinja wrote:On January 25 2018 22:25 Charoisaur wrote:
haha during BL/Infestor era Zerg players said Zerg players are just better too and of course during the blink era protoss players were much better.
Yes they did, but in case you missed it, they were doing that only as a snarky reference to what Terrans had been saying. No, they did not. Bias isn't something that is exclusive to Terran players, so don't make a fool of yourself. Yeah, I don't know why people are still trying to discuss this nonsense. It's stupid to say that Terrans are just better players, and equally stupid to say that about Protoss/Zerg. GomTvT had Terran apologists, BL/Infestor had Zerg apologists, and the Blink era had Protoss apologists. Every time one race is OP, there will be players who fight to keep the imbalance in their favor. It's been that way since 2010, it is still that way right now, and it will continue to be that way for as long as SC2 is still played. Not rocket science.
Nah the race I play is morally superior to the other races.
|
Because it's not about comp, but about the player.
|
So is the balance update live yet?
|
On January 30 2018 00:26 MockHamill wrote:
So is the balance update live yet?
Aren't the changes supposed to go through the PTR first? Or did i miss something and the hydra upgrade split/raven nerf/etc are supposed to go live today?
|
|
|
Well RIP raven once again. Without a defensive ability the unit will be absolutely and utterly worthless.
|
On January 30 2018 06:00 JackONeill wrote:
Well RIP raven once again. Without a defensive ability the unit will be absolutely and utterly worthless.
I do not agree. Interference matrix is now good vs Protoss, anti-armor missile is good vs Zerg and turrets is ok as an early defense or harass tool.
Old Raven with pdd was of course stronger but the Raven is stronger now compared to pre-patch.
|
On January 30 2018 06:49 MockHamill wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2018 06:00 JackONeill wrote:
Well RIP raven once again. Without a defensive ability the unit will be absolutely and utterly worthless. I do not agree. Interference matrix is now good vs Protoss, anti-armor missile is good vs Zerg and turrets is ok as an early defense or harass tool. Old Raven with pdd was of course stronger but the Raven is stronger now compared to pre-patch.
Without a defensive ability, the raven doesn't do its job.
No PDD => tempest hard counter mech on their own + corruptors shred vikings
No repair drone => parabomb and storms wreck vikings
|
On January 30 2018 08:34 JackONeill wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2018 06:49 MockHamill wrote:On January 30 2018 06:00 JackONeill wrote:
Well RIP raven once again. Without a defensive ability the unit will be absolutely and utterly worthless. I do not agree. Interference matrix is now good vs Protoss, anti-armor missile is good vs Zerg and turrets is ok as an early defense or harass tool. Old Raven with pdd was of course stronger but the Raven is stronger now compared to pre-patch. Without a defensive ability, the raven doesn't do its job. No PDD => tempest hard counter mech on their own + corruptors shred vikings No repair drone => parabomb and storms wreck vikings
Vikings get shredded my parabomb even if repair drone is a thing. Repair drone only helps a single unit at a time and has limited energy.
|
On January 30 2018 11:06 ReachTheSky wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2018 08:34 JackONeill wrote:On January 30 2018 06:49 MockHamill wrote:On January 30 2018 06:00 JackONeill wrote:
Well RIP raven once again. Without a defensive ability the unit will be absolutely and utterly worthless. I do not agree. Interference matrix is now good vs Protoss, anti-armor missile is good vs Zerg and turrets is ok as an early defense or harass tool. Old Raven with pdd was of course stronger but the Raven is stronger now compared to pre-patch. Without a defensive ability, the raven doesn't do its job. No PDD => tempest hard counter mech on their own + corruptors shred vikings No repair drone => parabomb and storms wreck vikings Vikings get shredded my parabomb even if repair drone is a thing. Repair drone only helps a single unit at a time and has limited energy.
Yes, and the repair drone's design is horrible anyway. Mech relies on ressources to maintain its forces with repair, allowing a energy for health spell was stupid.
However 1 raven can cast 2 repair drones that effectively negate the damage they're taking from parabomb. That's not much, but it's something. The auto turret helps in no way in that regard.
I'm glad the repair drone is gone, but the raven won't do its job with scrambler/turret/shredder.
|
On January 30 2018 08:34 JackONeill wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2018 06:49 MockHamill wrote:On January 30 2018 06:00 JackONeill wrote:
Well RIP raven once again. Without a defensive ability the unit will be absolutely and utterly worthless. I do not agree. Interference matrix is now good vs Protoss, anti-armor missile is good vs Zerg and turrets is ok as an early defense or harass tool. Old Raven with pdd was of course stronger but the Raven is stronger now compared to pre-patch. Without a defensive ability, the raven doesn't do its job. No PDD => tempest hard counter mech on their own + corruptors shred vikings No repair drone => parabomb and storms wreck vikings
It's not because you don't know how to split vikings or land them when PB is used, or hit and run with vikings vs corruptors, it's a balance issue.
Mech is already a joke in term of skill cap/powerfulness, with basically just sieging tanks/a moving hellbats/cyclon/thor, the air manage is maybe the only thing mech player has to do.
|
Has anyone tested if the new anti-armor missile makes it worth it to combine with the thor splash air attack instead of the single target air attack?
I did some testing pre-patch, I think the result was that is better to keep the thors in single damage mode most of the time, but now when the radius is larger maybe it is worth it?
Against armored targets, it does increase the splash damage by 50% (60% if the target has 1 native armor, 75% if target has 2 native armor) compared to not using the armor debuff.
DPS wise if you hit a single armored target that has the armor debuff you are about equal if they have no native armor. Against both 1 and 2 native armor you do more DPS is splash mode (combined with the armor debuff) as long as you hit at least 2 targets (compared the single target air attack).
I am not sure how this works in practice though since when you use the single target mode you can focus down units, which does not work as well when you use the splash mode.
|
So, how it's going? any future changes? Because it's smells like a big one mess, more and more. It's time to make another patch? I still don't understand what's was actually behind patch 4.0. It's like LotV units are became more unbalanced and destracting.
Where is Peace on Earth?
|
On January 31 2018 20:46 MockHamill wrote:
Has anyone tested if the new anti-armor missile makes it worth it to combine with the thor splash air attack instead of the single target air attack?
I did some testing pre-patch, I think the result was that is better to keep the thors in single damage mode most of the time, but now when the radius is larger maybe it is worth it?
Against armored targets, it does increase the splash damage by 50% (60% if the target has 1 native armor, 75% if target has 2 native armor) compared to not using the armor debuff.
DPS wise if you hit a single armored target that has the armor debuff you are about equal if they have no native armor. Against both 1 and 2 native armor you do more DPS is splash mode (combined with the armor debuff) as long as you hit at least 2 targets (compared the single target air attack).
I am not sure how this works in practice though since when you use the single target mode you can focus down units, which does not work as well when you use the splash mode.
That's a good point. Those two probably would synergize well.
|
didn't realize this patch actually went live, usually there's a balance update post on front page
|
I was reading the opinion poll about satisfaction with the new redesign, and overall I agree with the opinion that the redesign was good for Protoss, okay for Zerg, and largely inconsequential for Terran. I think the issue is that there is a weak overall vision for Terran from the design team at this point.
In the beginning of SC2, Protoss was the race that had to rely on turtling to a certain technology in order to have the strength to win the game. Colossus and Templar are the two most obvious examples of this.
Conversely, Zerg was the race that needed to have map control to know what mix of its numerous yet weak masses of units to build in order to surround and crush the opponent.
The original design for Terran was all about space control. Terran was the defensive race, taking locations and then forcing an opponent to move in and attack their fortified location. Meanwhile, Terran should always be harassing with its variety of versatile harassment units.
The unfolding and various redesigns of Protoss and Zerg up to this point have changed the identities of these races. Protoss now has "infantry" basically, and can rely on Gateway builds to an extent by massing Chargelots and harassing with the powerful Warp Prism while teching. Mass Chargelot along with a smattering of Templars and Archons is viable as well with the current strength of Chronoboost on upgrades.
Zerg, meanwhile, can turtle and drone while staying on Queens and Zerglings in order to get to a desired tech. Hydras and Ultralisks are the most common choice. The strength of Hydras means Zerg no longer has to respond to their opponent as much, they can build this unit and use it in all scenarios while gaining a better tech choice as well. Add to this that the design team has worked to give Zerg options for unexpected aggression throughout the game that means an opponent must be prepared for various attacks such as single-overlord drops and invincible Nydus Worms.
Terran, at this point, does not seem to have a unified vision from the design team. I think this is because of two main problems with Terran units overall.
1. Terran Mechanical Units generally have two modes: A powerful mode with a certain weakness and a vulnerable mode with generally no discernible strength.
Examples:
A. Siege Tanks while in siege mode have great space control, but are vulnerable to close range attacks as well as air-to-ground attacks.
B. Hellions have decent map control and decent splash damage but low hit points, Hellbats have decent splash damage but terrible speed. Neither of these units excels at its job, even when massed.
C. Vikings have decent anti-air attack power, but landed vikings have no real role other than to not be useless when there are no air units. Vikings originally dominated the air. Currently, they do not at all and even if you dedicate yourself to building vikings, a 70 drone Zerg can in one or 2 cycles make enough corruptors to shut you down comlpetely. When it was decided that Corruptors had no role in a ground game, they gained a building attack. The servos upgrade is an effort to change this, but so far it has simply made Vikings and Hellions a little less useless, not useful.
D. The Liberator is a powerful air-to-ground attacker that is immobile and vulnerable while sieged, but its air-to-air capability is now severely limited.
Point 1: Both modes of units that transform need to be useful in some way. They do not have to cover everything, but there needs to be a situation where one might go "Some landed Vikings/Hellbats/Air Liberators would really be helpful right now." I would have thought that the original idea behind having mechanical units transform was flexibility for various situations, but what it has become in general is "this is the good mode"... "this is the bad mode".
2. Some Terran units have simply been left behind the design/balance process. By this I mean, since there is no overall identity to Terran and there seems to be a commitment not to give Terran "tanking" units, certain units have no definite place in the game and no real reason to build them as part of a unit composition.
A. The widow mine originally gave the Terran powerful space control with the added power of the enemy being unable to discern how many mines were present and when they were going to reactivate because they remained invisible while rebuilding. (Keep in mind that the 2 units Terran gained in HOTS were the Widow Mine and the Hellbat. This will be a major support to my overall point in a moment.)
B. The Cyclone originally was designed to be a unit that would virtually guarantee a Terran could stay alive through the early game with its powerful single target damage with movement. Now the unit is a very expensive, somewhat tanky unit that has no place in a game that goes longer than five minutes.
C. The Raven once exemplified Terran's identity: a defensive powerhouse. Unfortunately, when massed this unit made for ridiculous situations.
D. The Reaper was once a unit that could serve as a scout or, with an upgrade, a powerful harassment unit. Now it is pigeon-holed into a "build 1 per game" type unit that may or may not get the information needed to live through the early game.
E. Bunkers do not do their job for defense, and bunker rushing is now absent from the game, meanwhile cannon rushing/proxy gates and early pool/fast Ravager builds are viable.
Point 2: The overall identity to Terran seems to be leaning towards heavy mobility for Bio or strong standing power with Mech, but many of the units don't support either of these identities, and thus Terran unit compositions are predictable and easily countered.
The compositions are either Marine/Marauder/Medivac or Hellion/Tank/Viking/Thor. Other units (with the exception of the Liberator) do not synergise well with these and can easily be overrun by units that are near impossible to counter such as Carriers, Brood Lords, Immortals, Mass Zealots, etc. It just seems very strange to watch a Terran with 500 apm managing three sets of drops and being countered at each place by Zealots with charge and better upgrades. I would think those who complain about "massing tier 1 units" might agree.
I say all this because I think the issue with Terran design lies with these two major points:
1. Terran units that transform should have strengths and weaknesses for each mode, not just one.
2. Terran units that have been left behind need a role in a unified vision for the Terran race.
Some will say that I'm asking too much, but what has happened for both Zerg and Protoss is that the balance team has creatively given each race Offensive and Defensive capabilities in the Early, Mid, and Late game. Terran does not have this.
Also, please keep in mind that while I may have mentioned balance here or there that this is a design thread and I am speaking about design. My opinion is that Protoss and especially Zerg are more comprehensively and better designed right now. My hope for the immediate future is versatility for Terran, not buffs for the core units I've mentioned as having their place already.
|
My problem with blizzard is they refuse to overbuff mech.Just make mech OP and turn it down... is it too hard to do ? Look at protoss in this patch ! Look at zerg in previous big update ! Clearly overbuffed !Both were broken as hell but now both are balanced.
Do not hesitate blizzard give us warhound back by remove cyclone's armor tag.I want to hear protoss players whine about mech... JUST FOR ONCE..
Landed viking is easy to fix tho.Just give it ability to shot air while in ground mode.This buff alone is enough to make goliath whine from terran players stfu and severely reduce prsi storm + PB strength.
|
As a terran player, my main complaint is against protoss. It seems the terran player has to be highly skilled and not make any mistakes in order to win against a protoss of even basic skill level (any diamond player, for instance, or even high platinums). Protoss get to control the game and terran have to respond in kind.
For instance, let's say we're starting a game versus protoss. Oh, you want to make a Mech-based army? Tanks, Goliath and such? Good luck with that, protoss have a SLEW of anti-armor units that will utterly destroy you.
Don't bother investing all of your +1 +2 +3 upgrades into mech .... Zealots, Stalkers, Immortals will crush them and The unit trade is terrible. So we can't invest in Mech.
Okay, so ... let's go Bio.
Well, you better have some BYUN type of control now with your Bio if the game gets to mid-game/late game.
Templar and storms will literally evaporate your entire army if your ghosts don't EMP them correctly or if you make a mistake.
Oh, you forgot to make vikings? Colossus are going to tear your bio army to SHREDS!
It just seems like the terran is constantly trying to adapt make units to counter the protoss and protoss control the game.
Don't even get me started on how many times I hear "oh .. you shouldn't have let protoss get that far. need to kill them early." That's stupid .. races should be balanced as time progresses.
Also, skytoss? Once they get 10 carriers and the mothership and storm - good luck, nothing will beat it except battlecruisers yamatoing and then running away. And its a long ... game ...
Oh and Protoss with Chrono-boosting their upgrades? You have a deadly army running into your base with +3 +3 before you can say "yikes."
Against Zerg none of this is a problem. Terran can mech and have a fair game. Terran can bio. Game is normal.
Protoss versus Terran is ridiculous. My two cents.
|
On January 25 2018 02:29 Tyrhanius wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2018 22:05 MrFreeman wrote:Darn, repair drone was my favourite spell, I really like to have my army always healed up and not relying on accompanying SCVs and steady mineral and gas income to achieve it. Well, at least I still have my zerg with constant heal on every single thing . On January 23 2018 21:32 _Epi_ wrote:On January 23 2018 18:37 Mithriel wrote:
I actually made Ravens for the repair drone and matrix, shame to lose the repair and get a turret.
Im no pro by any means, but felt like a repair for my mech army was useful and I dislike the turret in general. Mee too, I used the repair drone frequently and it was for me a big thing using the raven. Mech had a real lategame with the repair drone, it was not used enough to really point out being bad or not useful Glad I'm not the only one. Sometimes new stuff takes a really long time to catch on, even with the pros. It's a shame blizz weren't willing to give this ability the chance to prove its worth. You can build extra orbitals and use call down mules to repair your army anywhere on the map
Yep, that was my strategy b4 and what I've switch back to. It only costs me minerals to get them and the extra scans are really nice, but oh man, the free repair was so great and saved me so much gas and kept so many units alive. But maybe I've misread this and blizzard was in truth worried that repair drone might become too strong, rather than too unpopular.
PS: I wish there was a way for mules to have auto-repair on by default, but I guess that isn't an option, right? I just have to turn it on each time...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CM809rKWoAAiV0C.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/page_media/TRF4YK8EB8I31515797222826.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/page_media/DOCRV9Z220LZ1515797223260.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/page_media/FFDIWAAQO3Z31515797223147.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/page_media/09R3EQ20XR8B1515797223762.jpg)
