EPTUser was banned for this post.
Rogue: "I won because balance really favors Zerg" + commen…
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
alestormsabaton1994
12 Posts
User was banned for this post. | ||
|
Miralem Ibrahim
40 Posts
On September 29 2019 23:59 BisuDagger wrote: At what patch made zerg this powerful in the late game or has it always been this strong in LoTV? Wasn't Zerg essentially the same in 2018? I'm just curious if it took since LoTV release for Zerg to find its true potential and it had been there the whole time. Imo Zerg has the strongest late game since the raven nerf in 2018. It was just a matter of time before zerg figure out and refine their use of the Mass Infestor BL play. And even before this nerf they wasn't that many terrans who was winning using this style it was very hard to master. Only Maru and TY did it. In the opposite BL/Infestor is pretty easy to master every good zerg even at subtop level can beat top player T and P with it. And also nydus buff. Nydus are INCREDIBLY powerfull in mid to late game transition it allow the zergs to earn so many time and force both T and P to stay in the defensive position when they want to eat the zerg player when he does his transition to full late game. And off course map pool really favors zerg. | ||
|
NotSoHappy
445 Posts
This way we could balance it better without turning it into the under or over powered race it usualy is. | ||
|
Starecat
934 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland24261 Posts
On September 30 2019 05:20 NotSoHappy wrote: Since it turned into serious discussion, my honest opinion after so many years of sc2 (since beta) is this: Protoss is badly designed and for anything to change it should be re-designed. Remove the gimmicks, add buffs and design the race in someway that playing it (and vs it) it enjoyable expirience and not felt like I'm cheating or got cheated on every ladder game, because it is so heavily focused on all-ins due to mechanics of the race. This way we could balance it better without turning it into the under or over powered race it usualy is. Is Protoss badly designed though? Aspects of it are sure but there’s plenty of things in the game that are badly designed IMO, it’s just how they relate to each other. Terran bio for example, high DPS, super microable. Which is cool independently, but designing a game when you have this super microable composition that does damage super quickly when other races don’t have those options makes things wonky too. | ||
|
Anc13nt
1557 Posts
| ||
|
NotSoHappy
445 Posts
On September 30 2019 05:24 Wombat_NI wrote: Is Protoss badly designed though? Aspects of it are sure but there’s plenty of things in the game that are badly designed IMO, it’s just how they relate to each other. Terran bio for example, high DPS, super microable. Which is cool independently, but designing a game when you have this super microable composition that does damage super quickly when other races don’t have those options makes things wonky too. I mainly had in mind WG mechanics that neglect deffenders advantage, how harrass is designed and how playing macro is not so viable with Protoss as with other races. I'd add Msc here if they hadn't removed it and few more things, but I'm not so informed what is wrong and how it could be changed. Speaking about bio - that's the thing, that when you play bio and you learn how it works it's fun. While playing Z I'd rather play vs bio terran than mech, because it's enganging and fast-paced. Then with Protoss for most time we had death-bally units that complimented each other well when in a death-ball. I feel like protoss is missing something that could make it more fun race to play on every level. | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On September 30 2019 05:26 Anc13nt wrote: Maybe they should nerf infested terran or come up with a photon cannon upgrade (requiring a lot of tech so that it doesn't buff cannon rush) or something so that protoss doesn't need to keep so much army back to deal with zergling/infested terran harass. It seems to me that, very often in many ZvP lategames, the protoss moves out with everything they have and the zerg has enough to hold while inflicting devastating damage with a bunch of lings on the other side of the map. If cannons were better maybe they would be able to make that situation less common. Still, I wonder if what Rogue did with the infestors and lings in game 3 was actually a really good new idea or if Trap just dealt with it poorly. Or don't give to the map pool so many zerg favoring maps. That would be a good start  And behold, no nerfs! | ||
|
paddyz
Ireland628 Posts
On September 30 2019 01:37 waiting2Bbanned wrote: @paddyz Leaving aside the mental gymnastics you had to do to ignore the Aligulac balance graphs (how hard is it to flat-out deny the right-most end of the graph where all 3 races are basically equal LOL), I'm just gonna address the part where it seems to you that Trap's play was as great as it could be, while Rogue was just carried over by the easiest race to play: go look at some of Neeb's wins over Z if you want to see what good PvZ is like. As far as the 'Trap is the best PvZ player, but nothing to do against the big bad zerg' theory, you can look at Zest's showing against Rogue in the quarterfinal, where he actually put up a fight despite being far from his best form this year and PvZ being his worst MU. For the record, I don't think Trap is 'a shit player', just that he was massively outplayed in this finals and perhaps he might've done better if Rogue wasn't his teammate. I also don't think Dark is a shit player just because he got outplayed this time in the semis, although you might be able to find some balance reason for that and I can't wait to read about it Players have ups and downs, sometimes they do great for a whole tournament just to fall apart in the finals (see soO's GSL finals), while other players struggle through a tournament only to shine on the last day. It's why we play these games instead of just handing out trophies based on ladder ranking. He was addressing "high level play instead of shit play" The overall balance graph is effected by results from much lower rated player. The history/periods section is only from the top 5 which is the highest level play, that is logical, not mental gymnastics. I am referring to the same site. Only talking about balance at the top here as per his request. I never said Traps play was perfect or that he is the best at PvZ, I even said he was 241 rated below the highest rated PvZ. Rouge played Terribly vs Zest and Zest has it as his worst matchup because its the worst matchup in the game. I am not going to judge if Zest played far from his best form, its tricky to judge a Protoss based on the builds they go with in a matchup that trends towards loss without a big risk working, Zest was effective but ultimately its up to the Zerg if he wins it seems. One can't really say massively outplayed if its an unfair matchup (which Rogue even admitted) where one side has to resort to risks that shouldn't work out. Zerg won 66% of the ZvPs that tournament. "I also don't think Dark is a shit player just because he got outplayed this time in the semis, although you might be able to find some balance reason for that and I can't wait to read about it ". PettyTrap has been the most consistent protoss all year, he won all of his PvPs and PvTs and only lost to Zergs, the constant is PvZ. Stick to logic and stats next time I won't partake in some ad hominem petty back and forth. | ||
|
Vanadiel
France961 Posts
| ||
|
necrosexy
451 Posts
On September 29 2019 18:11 Penev wrote: Nydus worms should just have one head per butt, adjust butt cost accordingly. And the return of BL/Fester happened when ITs were buffed again. Just completely REMOVE that ability please; You shouldn't be able to save energy to get a bunch of marines on top of your existing army and when made useless like before why have them at all? Also lol at the people posting about the trivial Serral bit return of the bl/infestor happened because of the feedback nerf + nydus | ||
|
LTCM
174 Posts
On September 30 2019 05:26 Anc13nt wrote: Maybe they should nerf infested terran or come up with a photon cannon upgrade (requiring a lot of tech so that it doesn't buff cannon rush) or something so that protoss doesn't need to keep so much army back to deal with zergling/infested terran harass. It seems to me that, very often in many ZvP lategames, the protoss moves out with everything they have and the zerg has enough to hold while inflicting devastating damage with a bunch of lings on the other side of the map. If cannons were better maybe they would be able to make that situation less common. Still, I wonder if what Rogue did with the infestors and lings in game 3 was actually a really good new idea or if Trap just dealt with it poorly. Ah, yes. A why for protoss to defend bases. Something that could be used defensively with little to no offensive capabilities. Something to help push back Zerg camping overlords that cannot be hit. Let's see.... We could call it.... The mothership core!!!!! We kid but protoss has never recovered from that loss. | ||
|
onlystar
United States971 Posts
| ||
|
Boggyb
2855 Posts
| ||
|
Dave4
494 Posts
It's just not going to happen. Changes that large would effectively only be possible in a whole new expansion, it would fundamentally change the whole game and require new units and changes to Zerg and Terran too. SC2 is in the legacy games team at Blizzard. They do not have the capacity or indeed authority to completely redesign it that way. And furthermore who is to say that such a redesign would even be better anyway? It would very likely just lead to new issues. RE Rogues specific comments, I do think it's partly to save face of Trap after sweeping him. Zerg is certainly in a strong place now, but I think there's definitely still room for the meta to flux back. I'd like to see more HT use to hardcounter counter infestors with feedback, and likewise I think disruptors have great potential to clean them out as well. | ||
|
TheWildShooter
79 Posts
On September 30 2019 05:20 NotSoHappy wrote: Since it turned into serious discussion, my honest opinion after so many years of sc2 (since beta) is this: Protoss is badly designed and for anything to change it should be re-designed. Remove the gimmicks, add buffs and design the race in someway that playing it (and vs it) it enjoyable expirience and not felt like I'm cheating or got cheated on every ladder game, because it is so heavily focused on all-ins due to mechanics of the race. This way we could balance it better without turning it into the under or over powered race it usualy is. Are you a protoss player? I guess so. What makes you think like this? I'm sick of seeing such statements, but I usually don't respond to them because they come from Terran/Zerg players who simply hating on protoss and cannot be taken seriously. The funny thing about these statements is that they never sufficiently reasoned and usually come with flawed logic. In my opinion toss isn't badly designed race overall. Most people talking about toss design confuse cause and effect: majority of the bad aspects of toss design or what usually called "gimmicks" stems from design features of other races. Let me elaborate on that. When Blizzard decided to make bio units in SC2 so microable and high DPS it led to the fact that toss became super reliant on splash damage and tend to clump into deathball. Everyone was hating on MSC and its "one click defense" but how we ended up having such abomination in our game? It started with someone in the balance team think: "hey, lets make already strong drop play even better and give medivacs speed boost". Of course, they had to give protoss something to counterbalance new medivacs and that's how we got that band-aid mechanic. Tempest, the unit that was added solely to counter broodlords, still struggles to find any use besides cheese play despite repeated attemps of redesign. Meanwhile the broodlord, unit which is the reason for tempest existence and which plagues SC2 since 2012 and to this day seems fine design-wise for balance team. Everyone seems to hate recall aka "skillcall", but it have to be in the game as long as we have speedivacs and as long as zerg units significantly more mobile than toss units due to creep mechanic. So I'm against complete toss re-design. I like SC2 protoss, this race is unique in its own way. On the other hand, the really badly designed race in my opinion is zerg. Besides the already obvious Broodlord-infestors and nyduses they have the cheapest production (no need to invest into actual production buildings like toss or terran, 1 building is enough to produce required unit in unlimited numbers), instantaneous tech switches, plethora of free units, legal maphack in the form of creep spread (When they already have overlords since sc1). | ||
|
Xain0n
Italy3963 Posts
| ||
|
Boggyb
2855 Posts
On September 30 2019 09:02 Xain0n wrote: Discussing balance is one thing, these claims of certain races being "badly designed" are definitely uncalled for. Uncalled for? We've had at least one whiny player say that a race should be deleted multiple times. | ||
|
Inrau
35 Posts
Zerg's shouldn't be able to get 2 massive flanks in every section of the map. Ephemeron has the tight bridges, but even then destroying the rocks allows the map to be open as can be. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland24261 Posts
On September 30 2019 09:02 Xain0n wrote: Discussing balance is one thing, these claims of certain races being "badly designed" are definitely uncalled for. I’m not sure it’s uncalled for at all, I just think it’s wrong. PvP is really strategically dynamic, there are lots of viable compositions, there’s a lot of early and mid game benefits from good micro etc, there’s comeback potential etc etc, Protoss itself has a bunch of interesting elements to it. How that intersects with Zerg, yeah it’s a bad matchup but such problems are always blamed on Protoss and how it’s designed. Terran and Zerg are just as ‘badly designed’ as Protoss, indeed I think Terran are the worst of all given how everything intersects. | ||
| ||
