|
Polls have been added to the OP! |
I don't play the game anymore but I watch it like crazy -
some of these changes are *INSANE*. Why are they touching the game? I initially misread the changes to protoss air, wow, they gutted the shit out of carriers. They weren't *THAT* good.
Who decided widow mines need to be invisible? Widow mine drops are already abused like mad in tvp, Now they are going to be invisible? Have fun running your automatically clumping air units and small ground units into a couple of those invisible widow mines. Game over instantly because your entire army is dead from 2 widow mines your opponent burrowed somewhere random that you don't know about unless you have detection literally everywhere on the map. Right, good idea. What are you even supposed to do against tanks turrets and widow mines? Or even just tanks and turrets, since you don't actually get to know if widow mines are there.
So many of these changes make no sense though. I would say almost all of them make no sense. There's like one or two gems in there though.
Whenever you see a balance team try to make more than a couple changes at once, I would be worried. And the more drastic the changes are, the more I would worry. And the fact that for some reason those balance changes seem to be *in favor of* the race that historically wins the most at the top level... is confusing.
|
On September 12 2018 22:00 travis wrote:
IWho decided widow mines need to be invisible? Widow mine drops are already abused like mad in tvp, Now they are going to be invisible? Have fun running your automatically clumping air units and small ground units into a couple of those invisible widow mines. Game over instantly because your entire army is dead from 2 widow mines your opponent burrowed somewhere random that you don't know about unless you have detection literally everywhere on the map. Right, good idea. What are you even supposed to do against tanks turrets and widow mines? Or even just tanks and turrets, since you don't actually get to know if widow mines are there.
.
But, widow mines already work like that? They still are invisible, they always been, only the period between recharging is when they are visible. And as I said to deacon.frost, drilling claws isn't an easy tech to rush to make TvP drops any stronger.
But still WM ALREADY work like that, I'm not sure you actually watch the game.
|
He sure does watch like he was crazy lmao
|
I was under the impression that widow mines are visible during the process of locking on up until firing?
|
I can't imagine that they'll keep the tempest as it is now. It sh*ts on mech even harder than the old one, which is currently the main reason why mech isn't viable in TvP.
|
On September 13 2018 01:20 travis wrote:
I was under the impression that widow mines are visible during the process of locking on up until firing?
And that doesn't change.
|
On September 13 2018 01:46 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2018 01:20 travis wrote:
I was under the impression that widow mines are visible during the process of locking on up until firing? And that doesn't change.
well if that's true then I have no problem
but that is not what it says.
It says, "•Drilling Claws upgrade now also permanently cloaks the Widow Mine while burrowed."
"permanently cloaks"
as in you need to have detection to see it, ever.
|
On September 13 2018 01:20 travis wrote:
I was under the impression that widow mines are visible during the process of locking on up until firing?
Read the changes. All it does is so that when you research drilling claws they get reverted to pre- 4.0 mines with the also added bonus of them now being quicker to build. Meaning that when you walk in their range they are visible (Not targetable without detection) and while they are reloading you will also need detection to see them. This means protoss is still not forced to go into detection however like banshees if this tech choice is chosen you will want to have detection whether its an oracle or an observer it is not going to make a massive impact in balance based on what I know about how TvP is played. (It will probably be seen more in TvZ)
Edit: In retrospect I suppose yeah their wording is a little misleading but I can promise you you'll still be able to see it if you brush past its range or right before it fires.
|
On September 13 2018 01:58 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2018 01:46 Charoisaur wrote:On September 13 2018 01:20 travis wrote:
I was under the impression that widow mines are visible during the process of locking on up until firing? And that doesn't change. well if that's true then I have no problem but that is not what it says. It says, "•Drilling Claws upgrade now also permanently cloaks the Widow Mine while burrowed." "permanently cloaks" as in you need to have detection to see it, ever.
When WM fires there are some visuale indicators, however they remain cloacked until after they fire. There is no change there.
|
I wonder how significant of a change it would be to add the sliding mechanic banshees have when kiting to the Viking as well. I feel like that unit would have a much smoother time against units such as voidrays, tempests, warp prisms, medivacs broodlords, and corruptors. The micro of the Viking would also feel a lot smoother.
|
On September 12 2018 03:42 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2018 00:16 DomeGetta wrote:On September 11 2018 10:14 FrkFrJss wrote:
Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced. The fact that basically every win we see from Terran comes off proxy should make it pretty obvious that the pros dont see another way to win...or else theyd try it right??? Why try something else if proxy play has the highest winrate?
If you dont have another style that works as well.. u wouldnt..thats my point. If you had 2 styles with comprable results you would mix it up to not be as predictable but we dont see that at all. Since u can go full retard or bluff proxy based on what scout..its the better option. All you have to so is watch all the tvps from code s post raven nerf and you can watch the comedy unfold. I dont know if toss will come up with a good answer or not but i hope it doesnt last much longer..and if they do come up with one then the matchup is just fucked the other way so still needs tons of work...way more than what im seeing in this propos IMO
|
On September 13 2018 05:42 DomeGetta wrote:Show nested quote +On September 12 2018 03:42 Charoisaur wrote:On September 12 2018 00:16 DomeGetta wrote:On September 11 2018 10:14 FrkFrJss wrote:
Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced. The fact that basically every win we see from Terran comes off proxy should make it pretty obvious that the pros dont see another way to win...or else theyd try it right??? Why try something else if proxy play has the highest winrate? If you dont have another style that works as well.. u wouldnt..thats my point. If you had 2 styles with comprable results you would mix it up to not be as predictable but we dont see that at all. Since u can go full retard or bluff proxy based on what scout..its the better option. All you have to so is watch all the tvps from code s post raven nerf and you can watch the comedy unfold. I dont know if toss will come up with a good answer or not but i hope it doesnt last much longer..and if they do come up with one then the matchup is just fucked the other way so still needs tons of work...way more than what im seeing in this propos IMO
So the reason why people went blink all ins wasn't because the allins were op. People went blink allins because Protoss was underpowered.
I've watched a lot of PvTs since the nerf, and when the Terran can pull apart the Protoss, the Terran wins, and if the Protoss can defend the multi harass, the Protoss often wins.
|
i was waiting for something that would make infestors viable but alas, it was not meant to be...
|
On September 13 2018 06:07 FrkFrJss wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2018 05:42 DomeGetta wrote:On September 12 2018 03:42 Charoisaur wrote:On September 12 2018 00:16 DomeGetta wrote:On September 11 2018 10:14 FrkFrJss wrote:
Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced. The fact that basically every win we see from Terran comes off proxy should make it pretty obvious that the pros dont see another way to win...or else theyd try it right??? Why try something else if proxy play has the highest winrate? If you dont have another style that works as well.. u wouldnt..thats my point. If you had 2 styles with comprable results you would mix it up to not be as predictable but we dont see that at all. Since u can go full retard or bluff proxy based on what scout..its the better option. All you have to so is watch all the tvps from code s post raven nerf and you can watch the comedy unfold. I dont know if toss will come up with a good answer or not but i hope it doesnt last much longer..and if they do come up with one then the matchup is just fucked the other way so still needs tons of work...way more than what im seeing in this propos IMO So the reason why people went blink all ins wasn't because the allins were op. People went blink allins because Protoss was underpowered. I've watched a lot of PvTs since the nerf, and when the Terran can pull apart the Protoss, the Terran wins, and if the Protoss can defend the multi harass, the Protoss often wins.
I mean even during blink Allin era you would fairly often see Protoss do a different strategy, that was part of the strength of the Allin was that it was fairly ambiguous if you were going to do it or not and you could do stuff like hide the twilight or your extra gates to make it even harder to scout what your plan was. Now I guess there is also ambiguity in Terran proxies, what type of proxy is it? Is it an Allin proxy or is it a fake were they just proxy the rax but make a cc and factory back home ect, but it's not like you see Terran mixing in that many if Any standard openings and I think the reason is partially that proxies are a very good strategy but also that Terran players even with pro level micro don't have confidence in using macro strategies, from watching Maru he might use a macro strat like once in a bo7 and that's only after he has done 2-3 proxies already and he's just hedging against his opponent doing a counter build.And by macro I of course mean a 2 base or three base Allin with tanks+scv pull, because Terran wants to win quick. I think unless Protoss is explicitly countering proxy strats Terran macro strats just don't match up well with Protoss of a similar skill level.
Again I don't think that Terran is weaker than toss right now due to the strength of the new proxy style. I do however think that it's a problem if this is what the matchup becomes, Terran has a powerful early game but is practically unable to contest a 4 base Protoss so Terran will always opt to try to end the game in 12 minutes or less to prevent late game from occurring. This metagame is just so limited and really reduces variety in the matchup Protoss is forced into a highly defensive reactionary style almost every game and Terran is forced into a highly aggressive cheesy style almost evrey game. Now I admit other MUs have fairly forced roles like tvz Terran attacks zerg defends, but they at least offer a lot more choice in how players approach the matchup Terran can go mech or bio, they can go 1-1-1 or 2-1-1 they can do a variety of different things out of there 1-1-1 they can do a variety of different things out of there 2-1-1 that dictate how fast or slow the game will be and this creates a healthy and varied metagame, zerg options are more limited since they are somewhat dictated by Terran but they still have a fair amount of stylistic and reactionary choices about how queen heavy that want to go. If they want to get a safety bane nest or roach warren or tech more aggressively, if they want to invest in early overlord speed, if they want to commit to counterattacks and play on a slightly lower drone count or be more greedy and defensive ect. TvP is just fairly repetitive with both players forced by ballance into a very narrow range of options and the limited time frame that Terran is viable in compresses the time that players have to do interesting moves and make meaningful decisions, its balanced but I don't think it's what the matchup ideally should be and it fails to allow players to use there full range of skills.
|
On September 13 2018 07:42 washikie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2018 06:07 FrkFrJss wrote:On September 13 2018 05:42 DomeGetta wrote:On September 12 2018 03:42 Charoisaur wrote:On September 12 2018 00:16 DomeGetta wrote:On September 11 2018 10:14 FrkFrJss wrote:
Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced. The fact that basically every win we see from Terran comes off proxy should make it pretty obvious that the pros dont see another way to win...or else theyd try it right??? Why try something else if proxy play has the highest winrate? If you dont have another style that works as well.. u wouldnt..thats my point. If you had 2 styles with comprable results you would mix it up to not be as predictable but we dont see that at all. Since u can go full retard or bluff proxy based on what scout..its the better option. All you have to so is watch all the tvps from code s post raven nerf and you can watch the comedy unfold. I dont know if toss will come up with a good answer or not but i hope it doesnt last much longer..and if they do come up with one then the matchup is just fucked the other way so still needs tons of work...way more than what im seeing in this propos IMO So the reason why people went blink all ins wasn't because the allins were op. People went blink allins because Protoss was underpowered. I've watched a lot of PvTs since the nerf, and when the Terran can pull apart the Protoss, the Terran wins, and if the Protoss can defend the multi harass, the Protoss often wins. I mean even during blink Allin era you would fairly often see Protoss do a diffrent strtagey, that was part of the strength of the Allin was that it was fairly ambiguous if you were going to do it or not and you could do stuff like hide the twilight or your extra gates to make it even harder to scout what your plan was. Now I guess there is also ambiguity in Terran proxies, what type of proxy is it? Is it an Allin proxy or is it a fake were they just proxy the rax but make a cc and factory back home ect, but it's not like you see Terran mixing in that many if Any standard openings and I think the reason is partially that proxies are a very good stratagey but also that Terran players even with pro level micro don't have confidence in using macro stratagies, from watching Maru he might use a macro strat like once in a bo7 and that's only after he has done 2-3 proxies already and he's just hedging against his opponent doing a counter build.And by macro i off course mean a 2 base or three base Allin with tanks+scv pull, because Terran wants to win quick. I think unless Protoss is explicitly countering proxy strats Terran macro strats just don't match up well with Protoss of a similar skill level. Agian I don't think that Terran is weeker than toss right now due to the strength of the new proxy style. I do however think that it's a problem if this is what the matchup becomes, Terran has a powerfull early game but is practically unable to contest a 4 base Protoss so Terran will always opt to try to end the game in 12 minutes or less to prevent late game from occurring. This metagame is just so limited and really reduces variety in the matchup Protoss is forced into a highly deffensive reactionary style almost evrey game and Terran is forced into a highly aggressive cheesy style almost evrey game. Now I admit other MUs have fairly forced roles like tvz Terran attacks zerg defends, but they at least offer a lot more choice in how players aproach the matchup Terran can go mech or bio, they can go 1-1-1 or 2-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 1-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 2-1-1 that dictate how fast or slow the game will be and this creates a healthy and varied metagame, zerg options are more limited since they are somewhat dictated by Terran but they still have a fair amount of stylistic and reactionary choices about how queen heavy that want to go. If they want to get a safety bane nest or roach warren or tech more aggressively, if they want to invest in early overlord speed, if they want to commit to counterattacks and play on a slightly lower drone count or be more greedy and deffensive ect. TvP is just fairly repetitive with both players forced by ballance into a very narrow range of options and the limited time frame that Terran is viable in compresses the time that players have to do interesting moves and make meaningful decisions, its balanced but I don't think it's what the matchup ideally should be and it fails to allow players to use there full range of skills.
I'm not entirely sure I agree that Terran cannot contest a 4-base Protoss. I think if a Terran doesn't harass the Protoss and lets the Protoss get up to 4 bases uncontested, then yes, the Protoss has an advantage, but this type of scenario has always existed from the beginning of WoL. Protoss is weaker until they can get up splash to deal with bio. I don't think the fact that Terran is weaker at a certain stage of the game is necessarily a bad thing.
That's why Terran is so strong at drops and multi-pronged harass; they are intrinsically designed to put pressure on their opponents and make sure that their opponents can't reach a certain stage of the game unscathed. A couple games don't prove anything, but this scenario is fairly common. A Terran (maybe TY or Maru or Taeja back when he was pro) multi-prong drops the Protoss and gradually picks them apart until the main Terran bio force can kill the Protoss. Or what about Rain (when he was playing) and Stats defending against the drops, getting up to their splash, trading cost effectively, and then pushing to win over the Terran.
This was the classic complaint of MMM vs Colossus and HT back in WoL. Terran is strong in the early-mid game and weak in the late game. And to a certain extent, with liberators and cyclones along with disruptors (and adepts and oracles), Blizz has moved the matchup away from solely colossus and bio. However, the states of strength and weakness have not changed, and I think you would have to greatly change the game to change these states. Since all three races have asymmetrical balance to each other, their power levels balance each other out.
Protoss is strong in the lategame because of their power units that naturally come later in the game, and Terran is strong in the early-mid game because their units come early in the game, and with upgrades they are even stronger. Zerg is the race about continually ramping up the economy until they can overwhelm their opponent.
To change the strength of Terran in the lategame and Protoss in the early game, you would have to drastically change the balance of all the races. Now, Blizzard has also tried to use the liberator and the adept as ways to combat these problems, with the adept being strong in the early game and the liberator being really strong towards the later stages of the game. But the problem is that these units created their own balance problems with early adepts overwhelming early bio and liberators being very hard to deal with late game for Protoss. With nerfs, we've shifted back to T strength in early game and P strength in late game.
|
On September 13 2018 08:25 FrkFrJss wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2018 07:42 washikie wrote:On September 13 2018 06:07 FrkFrJss wrote:On September 13 2018 05:42 DomeGetta wrote:On September 12 2018 03:42 Charoisaur wrote:On September 12 2018 00:16 DomeGetta wrote:On September 11 2018 10:14 FrkFrJss wrote:
Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced. The fact that basically every win we see from Terran comes off proxy should make it pretty obvious that the pros dont see another way to win...or else theyd try it right??? Why try something else if proxy play has the highest winrate? If you dont have another style that works as well.. u wouldnt..thats my point. If you had 2 styles with comprable results you would mix it up to not be as predictable but we dont see that at all. Since u can go full retard or bluff proxy based on what scout..its the better option. All you have to so is watch all the tvps from code s post raven nerf and you can watch the comedy unfold. I dont know if toss will come up with a good answer or not but i hope it doesnt last much longer..and if they do come up with one then the matchup is just fucked the other way so still needs tons of work...way more than what im seeing in this propos IMO So the reason why people went blink all ins wasn't because the allins were op. People went blink allins because Protoss was underpowered. I've watched a lot of PvTs since the nerf, and when the Terran can pull apart the Protoss, the Terran wins, and if the Protoss can defend the multi harass, the Protoss often wins. I mean even during blink Allin era you would fairly often see Protoss do a diffrent strtagey, that was part of the strength of the Allin was that it was fairly ambiguous if you were going to do it or not and you could do stuff like hide the twilight or your extra gates to make it even harder to scout what your plan was. Now I guess there is also ambiguity in Terran proxies, what type of proxy is it? Is it an Allin proxy or is it a fake were they just proxy the rax but make a cc and factory back home ect, but it's not like you see Terran mixing in that many if Any standard openings and I think the reason is partially that proxies are a very good stratagey but also that Terran players even with pro level micro don't have confidence in using macro stratagies, from watching Maru he might use a macro strat like once in a bo7 and that's only after he has done 2-3 proxies already and he's just hedging against his opponent doing a counter build.And by macro i off course mean a 2 base or three base Allin with tanks+scv pull, because Terran wants to win quick. I think unless Protoss is explicitly countering proxy strats Terran macro strats just don't match up well with Protoss of a similar skill level. Agian I don't think that Terran is weeker than toss right now due to the strength of the new proxy style. I do however think that it's a problem if this is what the matchup becomes, Terran has a powerfull early game but is practically unable to contest a 4 base Protoss so Terran will always opt to try to end the game in 12 minutes or less to prevent late game from occurring. This metagame is just so limited and really reduces variety in the matchup Protoss is forced into a highly deffensive reactionary style almost evrey game and Terran is forced into a highly aggressive cheesy style almost evrey game. Now I admit other MUs have fairly forced roles like tvz Terran attacks zerg defends, but they at least offer a lot more choice in how players aproach the matchup Terran can go mech or bio, they can go 1-1-1 or 2-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 1-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 2-1-1 that dictate how fast or slow the game will be and this creates a healthy and varied metagame, zerg options are more limited since they are somewhat dictated by Terran but they still have a fair amount of stylistic and reactionary choices about how queen heavy that want to go. If they want to get a safety bane nest or roach warren or tech more aggressively, if they want to invest in early overlord speed, if they want to commit to counterattacks and play on a slightly lower drone count or be more greedy and deffensive ect. TvP is just fairly repetitive with both players forced by ballance into a very narrow range of options and the limited time frame that Terran is viable in compresses the time that players have to do interesting moves and make meaningful decisions, its balanced but I don't think it's what the matchup ideally should be and it fails to allow players to use there full range of skills. I'm not entirely sure I agree that Terran cannot contest a 4-base Protoss. I think if a Terran doesn't harass the Protoss and lets the Protoss get up to 4 bases uncontested, then yes, the Protoss has an advantage, but this type of scenario has always existed from the beginning of WoL. Protoss is weaker until they can get up splash to deal with bio. I don't think the fact that Terran is weaker at a certain stage of the game is necessarily a bad thing. That's why Terran is so strong at drops and multi-pronged harass; they are intrinsically designed to put pressure on their opponents and make sure that their opponents can't reach a certain stage of the game unscathed. A couple games don't prove anything, but this scenario is fairly common. A Terran (maybe TY or Maru or Taeja back when he was pro) multi-prong drops the Protoss and gradually picks them apart until the main Terran bio force can kill the Protoss. Or what about Rain (when he was playing) and Stats defending against the drops, getting up to their splash, trading cost effectively, and then pushing to win over the Terran. This was the classic complaint of MMM vs Colossus and HT back in WoL. Terran is strong in the early-mid game and weak in the late game. And to a certain extent, with liberators and cyclones along with disruptors (and adepts and oracles), Blizz has moved the matchup away from solely colossus and bio. However, the states of strength and weakness have not changed, and I think you would have to greatly change the game to change these states. Since all three races have asymmetrical balance to each other, their power levels balance each other out. Protoss is strong in the lategame because of their power units that naturally come later in the game, and Terran is strong in the early-mid game because their units come early in the game, and with upgrades they are even stronger. Zerg is the race about continually ramping up the economy until they can overwhelm their opponent. To change the strength of Terran in the lategame and Protoss in the early game, you would have to drastically change the balance of all the races. Now, Blizzard has also tried to use the liberator and the adept as ways to combat these problems, with the adept being strong in the early game and the liberator being really strong towards the later stages of the game. But the problem is that these units created their own balance problems with early adepts overwhelming early bio and liberators being very hard to deal with late game for Protoss. With nerfs, we've shifted back to T strength in early game and P strength in late game.
Link pro vods where the terran is "picking apart the toss" until late game on 4 bases and then wins. Post raven nerf. Its all 2 base all in or proxy has been for almost 2 months. You really should stop referencing hots / wol before disrupters tempests and liberators existed. Its not remotely relevant. Obvious statement: if the terran does crippling damage early game he can win. If he doesnt he cant there is no way for him to get a advantage late .. no comp that fights on even footing..will almost 100% of the time be behind on uprades.. these are the reasons we dont see it.. not because these guys have 70 percent winrates w proxy and 65 with macro play rofl. There was never an era of sc2 when toss only opened one way even during the blink era you still saw plenty of wins where the toss played macro.
|
On September 13 2018 08:25 FrkFrJss wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2018 07:42 washikie wrote:On September 13 2018 06:07 FrkFrJss wrote:On September 13 2018 05:42 DomeGetta wrote:On September 12 2018 03:42 Charoisaur wrote:On September 12 2018 00:16 DomeGetta wrote:On September 11 2018 10:14 FrkFrJss wrote:
Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced. The fact that basically every win we see from Terran comes off proxy should make it pretty obvious that the pros dont see another way to win...or else theyd try it right??? Why try something else if proxy play has the highest winrate? If you dont have another style that works as well.. u wouldnt..thats my point. If you had 2 styles with comprable results you would mix it up to not be as predictable but we dont see that at all. Since u can go full retard or bluff proxy based on what scout..its the better option. All you have to so is watch all the tvps from code s post raven nerf and you can watch the comedy unfold. I dont know if toss will come up with a good answer or not but i hope it doesnt last much longer..and if they do come up with one then the matchup is just fucked the other way so still needs tons of work...way more than what im seeing in this propos IMO So the reason why people went blink all ins wasn't because the allins were op. People went blink allins because Protoss was underpowered. I've watched a lot of PvTs since the nerf, and when the Terran can pull apart the Protoss, the Terran wins, and if the Protoss can defend the multi harass, the Protoss often wins. I mean even during blink Allin era you would fairly often see Protoss do a diffrent strtagey, that was part of the strength of the Allin was that it was fairly ambiguous if you were going to do it or not and you could do stuff like hide the twilight or your extra gates to make it even harder to scout what your plan was. Now I guess there is also ambiguity in Terran proxies, what type of proxy is it? Is it an Allin proxy or is it a fake were they just proxy the rax but make a cc and factory back home ect, but it's not like you see Terran mixing in that many if Any standard openings and I think the reason is partially that proxies are a very good stratagey but also that Terran players even with pro level micro don't have confidence in using macro stratagies, from watching Maru he might use a macro strat like once in a bo7 and that's only after he has done 2-3 proxies already and he's just hedging against his opponent doing a counter build.And by macro i off course mean a 2 base or three base Allin with tanks+scv pull, because Terran wants to win quick. I think unless Protoss is explicitly countering proxy strats Terran macro strats just don't match up well with Protoss of a similar skill level. Agian I don't think that Terran is weeker than toss right now due to the strength of the new proxy style. I do however think that it's a problem if this is what the matchup becomes, Terran has a powerfull early game but is practically unable to contest a 4 base Protoss so Terran will always opt to try to end the game in 12 minutes or less to prevent late game from occurring. This metagame is just so limited and really reduces variety in the matchup Protoss is forced into a highly deffensive reactionary style almost evrey game and Terran is forced into a highly aggressive cheesy style almost evrey game. Now I admit other MUs have fairly forced roles like tvz Terran attacks zerg defends, but they at least offer a lot more choice in how players aproach the matchup Terran can go mech or bio, they can go 1-1-1 or 2-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 1-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 2-1-1 that dictate how fast or slow the game will be and this creates a healthy and varied metagame, zerg options are more limited since they are somewhat dictated by Terran but they still have a fair amount of stylistic and reactionary choices about how queen heavy that want to go. If they want to get a safety bane nest or roach warren or tech more aggressively, if they want to invest in early overlord speed, if they want to commit to counterattacks and play on a slightly lower drone count or be more greedy and deffensive ect. TvP is just fairly repetitive with both players forced by ballance into a very narrow range of options and the limited time frame that Terran is viable in compresses the time that players have to do interesting moves and make meaningful decisions, its balanced but I don't think it's what the matchup ideally should be and it fails to allow players to use there full range of skills. I'm not entirely sure I agree that Terran cannot contest a 4-base Protoss. I think if a Terran doesn't harass the Protoss and lets the Protoss get up to 4 bases uncontested, then yes, the Protoss has an advantage, but this type of scenario has always existed from the beginning of WoL. Protoss is weaker until they can get up splash to deal with bio. I don't think the fact that Terran is weaker at a certain stage of the game is necessarily a bad thing. That's why Terran is so strong at drops and multi-pronged harass; they are intrinsically designed to put pressure on their opponents and make sure that their opponents can't reach a certain stage of the game unscathed. A couple games don't prove anything, but this scenario is fairly common. A Terran (maybe TY or Maru or Taeja back when he was pro) multi-prong drops the Protoss and gradually picks them apart until the main Terran bio force can kill the Protoss. Or what about Rain (when he was playing) and Stats defending against the drops, getting up to their splash, trading cost effectively, and then pushing to win over the Terran. This was the classic complaint of MMM vs Colossus and HT back in WoL. Terran is strong in the early-mid game and weak in the late game. And to a certain extent, with liberators and cyclones along with disruptors (and adepts and oracles), Blizz has moved the matchup away from solely colossus and bio. However, the states of strength and weakness have not changed, and I think you would have to greatly change the game to change these states. Since all three races have asymmetrical balance to each other, their power levels balance each other out. Protoss is strong in the lategame because of their power units that naturally come later in the game, and Terran is strong in the early-mid game because their units come early in the game, and with upgrades they are even stronger. Zerg is the race about continually ramping up the economy until they can overwhelm their opponent. To change the strength of Terran in the lategame and Protoss in the early game, you would have to drastically change the balance of all the races. Now, Blizzard has also tried to use the liberator and the adept as ways to combat these problems, with the adept being strong in the early game and the liberator being really strong towards the later stages of the game. But the problem is that these units created their own balance problems with early adepts overwhelming early bio and liberators being very hard to deal with late game for Protoss. With nerfs, we've shifted back to T strength in early game and P strength in late game.
The thing is that in a normal
Macro game right now Protoss can get out so many blink stalkers that they just totally shut down harassment past the first drop or tech unit. It used to be that building the number of gateway units Protoss does in this meta would not allow them to have enough tech units but because of the huge upgrade lead Protoss will almost always have in a macro game they are able to stay on pure gateway tech for a lot longer than they used to be able to and thus get a big Econ and upgrade lead while being nigh untouchable By harassment in the hands of a good player. this tight deffense can be kept up untill toss gets up to 4 basses and spread out a bit but at that point it's to late, the proxy plays and 2-3 base bio tank allins have been terran's answer to this problem and I admit it works. Since proxies allow Terran harass to hit before toss has everything locked down with stalkers and tank allins allow Terran to take a decisive fight before late game with an army that's good vs stalkers. But as I've stated earlier I don't think this proxy and 2-3 base Allin meta is a healthy place for the mu to be at. In lotv in the past we did get good interesting macro games between terran and toss but overtime with ballance changes toss has just pulled to far ahead in there late game power for Terran to contest them like they could earlier in lotv, playing a non Allin style as Terran just isn't a viable option. In this new meta the type of harass plays that used to work in macro builds tends to just be a good way to throw away units that you need for your Allin, you can still play harassment heavy styles but to do so you need to open very aggressively usualy with proxys.
|
On September 13 2018 01:42 JackONeill wrote:
I can't imagine that they'll keep the tempest as it is now. It sh*ts on mech even harder than the old one, which is currently the main reason why mech isn't viable in TvP.
Mech will be better now in TvP. Tempests are absolute paperweights now against Vikings and Thors kill them twice as fast now, plus Carriers are now so much worse. Yes, they can be more annoying now, but only the most biased person on the planet would consider this a Mech TvP nerf.
|
|
|
On September 13 2018 12:35 washikie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2018 08:25 FrkFrJss wrote:On September 13 2018 07:42 washikie wrote:On September 13 2018 06:07 FrkFrJss wrote:On September 13 2018 05:42 DomeGetta wrote:On September 12 2018 03:42 Charoisaur wrote:On September 12 2018 00:16 DomeGetta wrote:On September 11 2018 10:14 FrkFrJss wrote:
Now, this isn't to say that Terran doesn't struggle in lategame against Protoss, but perhaps they cheese because it nets them a much higher winrate than if they don't cheese?
Often times, pros are pragmatic people who will do a strategy that will let them win. Why did so many Zerg go infestor/broodlord? It was winning. Why did so many people go blink stalkers in 2014? They would win. Why did so many people go proxy oracles or adept allins? It would win. Why were drop overlords so present in early ZvP 2018 meta? It would win.
People go proxies sometimes because of imbalance. People also go proxies because they win. Just because a race goes for a lot proxies does not mean that the race is necessarily imbalanced. The fact that basically every win we see from Terran comes off proxy should make it pretty obvious that the pros dont see another way to win...or else theyd try it right??? Why try something else if proxy play has the highest winrate? If you dont have another style that works as well.. u wouldnt..thats my point. If you had 2 styles with comprable results you would mix it up to not be as predictable but we dont see that at all. Since u can go full retard or bluff proxy based on what scout..its the better option. All you have to so is watch all the tvps from code s post raven nerf and you can watch the comedy unfold. I dont know if toss will come up with a good answer or not but i hope it doesnt last much longer..and if they do come up with one then the matchup is just fucked the other way so still needs tons of work...way more than what im seeing in this propos IMO So the reason why people went blink all ins wasn't because the allins were op. People went blink allins because Protoss was underpowered. I've watched a lot of PvTs since the nerf, and when the Terran can pull apart the Protoss, the Terran wins, and if the Protoss can defend the multi harass, the Protoss often wins. I mean even during blink Allin era you would fairly often see Protoss do a diffrent strtagey, that was part of the strength of the Allin was that it was fairly ambiguous if you were going to do it or not and you could do stuff like hide the twilight or your extra gates to make it even harder to scout what your plan was. Now I guess there is also ambiguity in Terran proxies, what type of proxy is it? Is it an Allin proxy or is it a fake were they just proxy the rax but make a cc and factory back home ect, but it's not like you see Terran mixing in that many if Any standard openings and I think the reason is partially that proxies are a very good stratagey but also that Terran players even with pro level micro don't have confidence in using macro stratagies, from watching Maru he might use a macro strat like once in a bo7 and that's only after he has done 2-3 proxies already and he's just hedging against his opponent doing a counter build.And by macro i off course mean a 2 base or three base Allin with tanks+scv pull, because Terran wants to win quick. I think unless Protoss is explicitly countering proxy strats Terran macro strats just don't match up well with Protoss of a similar skill level. Agian I don't think that Terran is weeker than toss right now due to the strength of the new proxy style. I do however think that it's a problem if this is what the matchup becomes, Terran has a powerfull early game but is practically unable to contest a 4 base Protoss so Terran will always opt to try to end the game in 12 minutes or less to prevent late game from occurring. This metagame is just so limited and really reduces variety in the matchup Protoss is forced into a highly deffensive reactionary style almost evrey game and Terran is forced into a highly aggressive cheesy style almost evrey game. Now I admit other MUs have fairly forced roles like tvz Terran attacks zerg defends, but they at least offer a lot more choice in how players aproach the matchup Terran can go mech or bio, they can go 1-1-1 or 2-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 1-1-1 they can do a variety of diffrent things out of there 2-1-1 that dictate how fast or slow the game will be and this creates a healthy and varied metagame, zerg options are more limited since they are somewhat dictated by Terran but they still have a fair amount of stylistic and reactionary choices about how queen heavy that want to go. If they want to get a safety bane nest or roach warren or tech more aggressively, if they want to invest in early overlord speed, if they want to commit to counterattacks and play on a slightly lower drone count or be more greedy and deffensive ect. TvP is just fairly repetitive with both players forced by ballance into a very narrow range of options and the limited time frame that Terran is viable in compresses the time that players have to do interesting moves and make meaningful decisions, its balanced but I don't think it's what the matchup ideally should be and it fails to allow players to use there full range of skills. I'm not entirely sure I agree that Terran cannot contest a 4-base Protoss. I think if a Terran doesn't harass the Protoss and lets the Protoss get up to 4 bases uncontested, then yes, the Protoss has an advantage, but this type of scenario has always existed from the beginning of WoL. Protoss is weaker until they can get up splash to deal with bio. I don't think the fact that Terran is weaker at a certain stage of the game is necessarily a bad thing. That's why Terran is so strong at drops and multi-pronged harass; they are intrinsically designed to put pressure on their opponents and make sure that their opponents can't reach a certain stage of the game unscathed. A couple games don't prove anything, but this scenario is fairly common. A Terran (maybe TY or Maru or Taeja back when he was pro) multi-prong drops the Protoss and gradually picks them apart until the main Terran bio force can kill the Protoss. Or what about Rain (when he was playing) and Stats defending against the drops, getting up to their splash, trading cost effectively, and then pushing to win over the Terran. This was the classic complaint of MMM vs Colossus and HT back in WoL. Terran is strong in the early-mid game and weak in the late game. And to a certain extent, with liberators and cyclones along with disruptors (and adepts and oracles), Blizz has moved the matchup away from solely colossus and bio. However, the states of strength and weakness have not changed, and I think you would have to greatly change the game to change these states. Since all three races have asymmetrical balance to each other, their power levels balance each other out. Protoss is strong in the lategame because of their power units that naturally come later in the game, and Terran is strong in the early-mid game because their units come early in the game, and with upgrades they are even stronger. Zerg is the race about continually ramping up the economy until they can overwhelm their opponent. To change the strength of Terran in the lategame and Protoss in the early game, you would have to drastically change the balance of all the races. Now, Blizzard has also tried to use the liberator and the adept as ways to combat these problems, with the adept being strong in the early game and the liberator being really strong towards the later stages of the game. But the problem is that these units created their own balance problems with early adepts overwhelming early bio and liberators being very hard to deal with late game for Protoss. With nerfs, we've shifted back to T strength in early game and P strength in late game. The thing is that in a normal Macro game right now Protoss can get out so many blink stalkers that they just totally shut down harassment past the first drop or tech unit. It used to be that building the number of gateway units Protoss does in this meta would not allow them to have enough tech units but because of the huge upgrade lead Protoss will almost always have in a macro game they are able to stay on pure gateway tech for a lot longer than they used to be able to and thus get a big Econ and upgrade lead while being nigh untouchable By harassment in the hands of a good player. this tight deffense can be kept up untill toss gets up to 4 basses and spread out a bit but at that point it's to late, the proxy plays and 2-3 base bio tank allins have been terran's answer to this problem and I admit it works. Since proxies allow Terran harass to hit before toss has everything locked down with stalkers and tank allins allow Terran to take a decisive fight before late game with an army that's good vs stalkers. But as I've stated earlier I don't think this proxy and 2-3 base Allin meta is a healthy place for the mu to be at. In lotv in the past we did get good interesting macro games between terran and toss but overtime with ballance changes toss has just pulled to far ahead in there late game power for Terran to contest them like they could earlier in lotv, playing a non Allin style as Terran just isn't a viable option. In this new meta the type of harass plays that used to work in macro builds tends to just be a good way to throw away units that you need for your Allin, you can still play harassment heavy styles but to do so you need to open very aggressively usualy with proxys.
In theory yes, but in practice no, Protoss don't shut down two pronged harassment very easily. Look at Neeb vs TY, that's a game where TY either dropped or just ran units to lesser defended bases, and Neeb was very much picked apart. TY won or almost won macro games against Neeb, and macro games are Neeb's forte.
I do also want to ask which balance changes throughout LotV actually made Protoss better in the late game. I know the liberator got nerfed, and the warp prism got buffed, but I'm having trouble seeing exactly where Terran was nerfed and where Protoss was buffed that caused this late game imbalance. Raven nerfs were relatively recent, and Tempest buffs were quite a long time ago.
Classic and Innovation played a 23 minute macro game in the Kung Fu Cup relatively recently. It was pretty back and forth, and perhaps I'm blind, but I didn't see any "blink stalkers" defending until four bases. What I mean is that after Inno's failed proxy hellion drop, they both made it to the late game and traded armies. Inno did not do a lot of multi-pronged drops, and instead, he went for the big fights. Through harass, Classic was able to gain an economic lead (5 or 6 to 4 bases) and eventually won off of that lead (also in a big fight around the 17 minute mark, Inno was unprepared for the number of colossi).
I didn't see Classic make any huge mistakes, but the game still seemed pretty even despite Inno's failed proxy hellion drop and Classic's oracle/phoenix harass afterwards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
