| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Decendos
Germany1341 Posts
Results of last 4 weeks? GSL / TSL etc.? They actually go through with such dumb logic "its only small buff to WM and only 3 small nerfs to Zerg"...yeah so its 4 changes that buff T in the MU that is already pretty T favored... Well we´ll see i guess Z can just go infestors now that microbial thing is OP - LOL! :-D | ||
|
Luolis
Finland7201 Posts
On May 20 2020 15:21 Decendos wrote: Results of last 4 weeks? GSL / TSL etc.? They actually go through with such dumb logic "its only small buff to WM and only 3 small nerfs to Zerg"...yeah so its 4 changes that buff T in the MU that is already pretty T favored... Well we´ll see i guess Z can just go infestors now that microbial thing is OP - LOL! :-D Can you point a single result from GSL where the zerg should have won a game they lost? TSL is still going on and the results really are not that outrageous (especially if you include cross-server lag). | ||
|
Decendos
Germany1341 Posts
On May 20 2020 15:36 Luolis wrote: Can you point a single result from GSL where the zerg should have won a game they lost? TSL is still going on and the results really are not that outrageous (especially if you include cross-server lag). erm is it the good old Terran player play better so they deserve to win argument again? Winrates of last 4 weeks dont care about single games. Its not like TvZ is broken now - its slightly T favored but 4 (!!) favorable buffs for T in the MU will break it. I am completely fine with the 4 changes if there is at least 1-2 buffs for Z in TvZ that are also minor. Best ofc to units that suck like infestor, SHs or Hydras (in ZvT: for example give them slight antihealing effect or sth. like that). | ||
Olli
Austria24422 Posts
I also highly disagree with how they perceive PvZ lategame issues. The main problem is not that Zerg can get there greedily, it's that Protoss lategame units flat out suck compared to zerg's. Tempests, carriers and void rays are among the worst units in the game still, and the mothership "-400/400" meme is, well, less of a meme and more completely accurate. In a fight against a zerg lategame army of BL/mass corruptor/viper/static defense/maybe some infestors, whatever army Protoss can build is still really disadvantaged, and their approach will only encourage and strengthen the "kill them before they get there" pushes we already see from every Korean Protoss. You might get PvZ winrates swinging the other way but you're not addressing the root problem at all. You can be on equal footing economically as Protoss, transitioning to a lategame army will still not be the preferred option for most players. They'll just go and hit their timings even harder. Personally the big issues I see in PvZ are these lategame unit issues, and how easy and risk-free it is for zerg to harass super effectively. You can roll a handful of banelings into mineral lines all game and it's incredibly difficult for even the very top Protoss players to consistently defend them all. Two +2 banelings basically wipe out a full mineral line and you get no notification before the damage is already done. And if you have units parked there, well they're also dead. Any form of Protoss harass is damage dealt over time, so zergs can react to their mineral lines being under attack. The only exception is storm drops, but they're a huge investment and require a lot more attention to execute. At the very least I think probes should benefit from shield upgrades so they can tank an additional hit if Protoss invests in the necessary upgrades, and make the investment a little higher for zerg to kill entire mineral lines. Iirc this has been suggested by a couple pros too. Call me crazy but I wouldn't mind a lategame (!) upgrade for photon cannons either, something like increasing their firing rate a little so that cannons on their own can better defend mineral lines and kill 1-2 additional banelings before the reach a mineral line. As it is, cannons might as well not exist lategame unless you spam 800 minerals worth of cannons to protect a single base. Compared to how effective (and even mobile) static defense is for Zerg, or how planetary fortresses and missile turrets hold off light investment in harass, cannons just do nothing. Given Protoss' general underperformance for the last two years (Aligulac), it's time to just buff the race outright. Much of the build order variety in HotS PvP had to do with each of the possible openings being strong in its own right. There's absolutely room for an oracle buff in the game, at the very least one affecting PvP. There's room to experiment with a blink research time reduction I feel. Absolutely room in the game to buff carriers, void rays, tempests lategame, if only through lategame upgrades. I'm not saying do all of these at once, or that all of these would play out well, I'm saying try one or two of these general buffs and see what happens. Units of other races have seen outright buffs - thor range and damage type, BCs have been buffed multiple times, siege tanks got buffs against Protoss, EMP got a massive buff, widow mines are getting a buff, and Terran winrates have gradually improved accordingly, to a point where I feel they're in a pretty good state in both matchups, even if more could be done to address certain stages of the game. Try the same for Protoss. Also, the oracle change is actually yet another nerf aside from clearing creep. It means revelation on armies runs out much more quickly and, as you're playing with minimal observer coverage with SG builds, you're just going to lose track of opposition armies much more easily and you'll see oracles lost trying to find the army for constant revelations much more regularly. Same goes for detection against lurkers or widow mines in straight up fights. I'd much rather keep revelation as it is. The most common oracle build vs Zerg is three oracle anyway, so there should be enough energy among them to still clear creep effectively with the current energy cost if creep tumors are changed to light. | ||
|
Luolis
Finland7201 Posts
On May 20 2020 15:42 Decendos wrote: erm is it the good old Terran player play better so they deserve to win argument again? Winrates of last 4 weeks dont care about single games. Its not like TvZ is broken now - its slightly T favored but 4 (!!) favorable buffs for T in the MU will break it. . Yea are you telling me that scarlett losing to innovation is a sign of imbalance, or that Maru and Innovation beating Ragnarok are upsets? The winrates are quite even in total. The mine change won't change shit, nor will the bane nerf. Queen nerf and creep nerf will have some effect, but we'll have to wait and see what the full extent of that is. | ||
|
blooblooblahblah
Australia4163 Posts
I'm not really sold on the battery overcharge but I'm fine with it on the basis that the matchup is pure garbage and any change would be nice | ||
|
BerserkSword
United States2123 Posts
On May 20 2020 15:58 Luolis wrote: Yea are you telling me that scarlett losing to innovation is a sign of imbalance, or that Maru and Innovation beating Ragnarok are upsets? The winrates are quite even in total. The mine change won't change shit, nor will the bane nerf. Queen nerf and creep nerf will have some effect, but we'll have to wait and see what the full extent of that is. While I like that they didnt take the HP off of banes, I still think even this small bane nerf is huge, especially in TvZ. Zerg is already struggling HARD to trade anywhere close to efficiently against Terran. This nerf makes it even worse as banes still do find connections on things like marauders and tanks. The way the state of the TvZ metagame is right now, even a "small" nerf like this will have significant consequences. We are talking about a gas costing unit REQUIRED for zerg to combat a mineral only marine, and this same gas unit can disappear en masse in the blink of an eye from a widow mine shot or a tank shot or something, not to mention the counter play against it is huge with splitting and hot pickups. The mine buff is significant as well. It opens up stronger hellbat timings and mech is extremely viable against zerg already. The queen nerf is actually a nerf to roach ravager, which already struggles a lot vs banshees and drop play. Things are looking grim for zerg imo | ||
|
pvsnp
7676 Posts
On May 20 2020 16:23 BerserkSword wrote: While I like that they didnt take the HP off of banes, I still think even this small bane nerf is huge, especially in TvZ. Zerg is already struggling HARD to trade anywhere close to efficiently against Terran. This nerf makes it even worse as banes still do find connections on things like marauders and tanks. The way the state of the TvZ metagame is right now, even a "small" nerf like this will have significant consequences. The mine buff is significant as well. It opens up stronger hellbat timings and mech is extremely viable against zerg already. The queen nerf is actually a nerf to roach ravager, which already struggles a lot vs banshees and drop play. Things are looking grim for zerg imo Worst comes to worst, maybe Zerg suffers in ZvT for a couple months. Sucks for them I guess, but it's nothing the other races haven't had to deal with over the past few years. Perfect balance is impossible, and Zerg has been on the good side for quite some time. They'll get over it. I think it was Rotti who said on the Pylon Show "Maybe they nerf Zerg a little too much. Is that really such a bad thing?" | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12134 Posts
On May 20 2020 13:55 TentativePanda wrote: 40% Zerg winrate, and one in GSL Ro8 + devastating nerfs sounds like a well thought out idea not influenced by the best performing race whining whatsoever (pls don’t warn me for truthing lol) At the same time Rogue won IEM and Dark was 2nd at ST with a really close finals. I don't know, Kev. Edit> also where have you been when everything has been won by zergs? Multiple Code S, WCS, IEM, Blizzcons? | ||
|
Shuffleblade
Sweden1903 Posts
Several poster here have pointed out that the reason Proxy immortal is strong is because other openings are too weak, I Think that is a very interesting take on it. I mean sure buff some stuff for protoss but I am also scared of the return of the deathball, I feel the problem for protoss has been that their units have too good synergy overall. The great synnergy means that while the unit is weak or mediocre alone it becomes balanced with the right support, if you buff it so its actually good in itself then it becomes OP with the right support units. In regards to zerg being weak, zerg is the race most focused on getting ahead on the economy, the macro race if you will. historically it feels like the race most focused on defense over time becomes stronger exponentially as they get used to defend everything from the other races. I believe the game in some situations needs to very imbalanced in the start for it to actually be more balanced when the patch meta gets figured out. The reason balance changes needs to be done periodically is not because imbalance exist and is obvious from the start, its because imbalance develops as the meta gets figured out. | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12134 Posts
On May 20 2020 15:42 Decendos wrote: erm is it the good old Terran player play better so they deserve to win argument again? Winrates of last 4 weeks dont care about single games. Its not like TvZ is broken now - its slightly T favored but 4 (!!) favorable buffs for T in the MU will break it. I am completely fine with the 4 changes if there is at least 1-2 buffs for Z in TvZ that are also minor. Best ofc to units that suck like infestor, SHs or Hydras (in ZvT: for example give them slight antihealing effect or sth. like that). Well Zerg players are just better was the reason why we have so many Zerg champions in the past 2 years while so little from other races. Why doesn't it work now when Zergs are not, finally, on the receiving side? (also it's not like soO didn't even try and Rogue played really poorly) | ||
|
seemsgood
5527 Posts
On May 20 2020 15:42 Decendos wrote: erm is it the good old Terran player play better so they deserve to win argument again? Winrates of last 4 weeks dont care about single games. Its not like TvZ is broken now - its slightly T favored but 4 (!!) favorable buffs for T in the MU will break it. I am completely fine with the 4 changes if there is at least 1-2 buffs for Z in TvZ that are also minor. Best ofc to units that suck like infestor, SHs or Hydras (in ZvT: for example give them slight antihealing effect or sth. like that). because people would have a totally different view towards TvZ if 2019 map pool was used watching dark vs mary grand final VODs almost got me think that its not possible to slow down zerg if played by the hands of most talented players like serral,dark and rogue | ||
|
seemsgood
5527 Posts
On May 20 2020 15:21 Decendos wrote: Results of last 4 weeks? GSL / TSL etc.? They actually go through with such dumb logic "its only small buff to WM and only 3 small nerfs to Zerg"...yeah so its 4 changes that buff T in the MU that is already pretty T favored... Well we´ll see i guess Z can just go infestors now that microbial thing is OP - LOL! :-D since korea scene is a playground of soO ,dark and rogue , i think a terran tournament such as GSL should have at least 2 zerg players but it s quite unfort that rogue was defeated by Sub"scarlett" Zero On May 20 2020 16:23 BerserkSword wrote: While I like that they didnt take the HP off of banes, I still think even this small bane nerf is huge, especially in TvZ. Zerg is already struggling HARD to trade anywhere close to efficiently against Terran. This nerf makes it even worse as banes still do find connections on things like marauders and tanks. The way the state of the TvZ metagame is right now, even a "small" nerf like this will have significant consequences. We are talking about a gas costing unit REQUIRED for zerg to combat a mineral only marine, and this same gas unit can disappear en masse in the blink of an eye from a widow mine shot or a tank shot or something, not to mention the counter play against it is huge with splitting and hot pickups. The mine buff is significant as well. It opens up stronger hellbat timings and mech is extremely viable against zerg already. The queen nerf is actually a nerf to roach ravager, which already struggles a lot vs banshees and drop play. Things are looking grim for zerg imo i would kill for moar mech but mech play needs to be stronger than bios first if terran players dont find mech is stronger than bios then they wont use it and the first culprit i can name it is swarm host On May 20 2020 16:36 deacon.frost wrote: Well Zerg players are just better was the reason why we have so many Zerg champions in the past 2 years while so little from other races. Why doesn't it work now when Zergs are not, finally, on the receiving side? (also it's not like soO didn't even try and Rogue played really poorly) i seriously think zerg players were just better in last 2 years tho. not that they were better than other races on the whole but they were too good at thier own shits so we re gonna make thier life a little bit harder dats an example of how being better than others could become a sin right there | ||
|
MockHamill
Sweden1798 Posts
Not sure about the new overcharge ability though. It may be needed in PvP but may be too strong in the other matchups. | ||
Teoita
Italy12248 Posts
On May 20 2020 15:42 Olli wrote: I also highly disagree with how they perceive PvZ lategame issues Well, part of the problem is that Zergs are so strong defensively, so to some extent they are right. On the other hand, it's insane that lategame PvZ still revolves around the goddamn Mothership, it honestly should be nerfed into the ground and other things should be buffed to compensate. To name one, it's insane that Interceptors still cost money when broodlings and locusts never have. Currently a carrier is formally 480/250, but in practice it's more about ~800-1000/250 because of how easily interceptors die. What Protoss gets for that cost is questionable at best. Imo, the other thing that makes lategame PvZ ass is that zerg static defense becomes an incredibly cost effective part of their main army. If it weren't for those two things I think you could have a decent-ish matchup, because both armies kind of rely on similar concepts and compositions of long range siege + sniper unit + support caster(s), so you could possibly get to a point where it feels more about execution and less about "kill him before he gets there, or have a big advantage when he does". edit: also, fun fact. Going by Aligulac, PvZ has only been significantly Protoss-favoured for a brief period in 2010, 2011, and for a few months early in 2019, otherwise it's mostly been Zerg favoured with even periods in 2014 and 2015,. Obviously there's biases in their stats, but given that it's the largest sample size of high level games available it's still pretty telling imo. | ||
|
Olli
Austria24422 Posts
On May 20 2020 16:57 Teoita wrote: Well, part of the problem is that Zergs are so strong defensively, so to some extent they are right. On the other hand, it's insane that lategame PvZ still revolves around the goddamn Mothership, it honestly should be nerfed into the ground and other things should be buffed to compensate. To name one, it's insane that Interceptors still cost money when broodlings and locusts never have. Currently a carrier is formally 480/250, but in practice it's more about ~800-1000/250 because of how easily interceptors die. What Protoss gets for that cost is, well, questionable at best. Imo, the other thing that makes lategame PvZ ass is that zerg static defense becomes an incredibly cost effective part of their main army. If it weren't for those two things I think you could have a decent-ish matchup, because both armies kind of rely on similar concepts and compositions of long range siege + sniper unit + support caster(s). To some degree, sure. But again, the problem is that if both players go into lategame on equal footing, Zerg just makes better stuff and wins. And if Protoss is ahead off the midgame, they're usually in a spot to end the game. There's no incentive for Protoss to go to their own lategame units rather than push their midgame advantage to victory. That's how most PvZs in favor of Protoss already end. While buffing them midgame would likely see Protoss winrates improve significantly, that in itself shouldn't be a goal worth pursuing, as you describe pretty well. The same way it isn't great that Terran's doing pretty well vs Protoss stems in no small part from SCV pulls. The goal should be balancing winrates through changes that also make the game more entertaining to watch and play. I'm sure both Protoss and Zerg would agree that PvZ would be better served if it wasn't set in this "don't let them get there" state. I thought we were done with this type of balancing. Reminds me way too much of WoL PvZ. | ||
|
Fuzer
Finland266 Posts
Because there are 20 Zergs and 3 Terrans in prolevel and those 3 Terrans beat Zergs all the time on the tourneys! | ||
|
Teoita
Italy12248 Posts
On May 20 2020 17:06 Olli wrote: To some degree, sure. But again, the problem is that if both players go into lategame on equal footing, Zerg just makes better stuff and wins. There's no incentive for Protoss to go to the lategame rather than push their buffed midgame even more to avoid giving Zerg a way back into the game. That would likely see Protoss winrates improve significantly, but that in itself shouldn't be a goal worth pursuing. The same way it isn't great that Terran's doing pretty well vs Protoss stems in no small part from SCV pulls. The goal should be balancing winrates through changes that also make the game more entertaining to watch and play. I'm sure both Protoss and Zerg would agree that PvZ would be better served if it wasn't set in this "don't let them get there" state. I thought we were done with this type of balancing. Reminds me way too much of WoL PvZ. That's where my "buff other things to compensate" comes in. My point is, they should be buffed enough that Protoss doesn't have to go full WoL on Zergs. | ||
|
Olli
Austria24422 Posts
On May 20 2020 17:09 Teoita wrote: That's where my "buff other things to compensate" comes in. My point is, they should be buffed enough that Protoss doesn't have to go full WoL on Zergs. That's exactly my thinking. As it stands, who on earth would ever want to make a tempest, carrier or void ray lategame (not mentioning mothership; remove the thing!) unless they're forced to? The better choice is almost always to just add gates and have at them before they get their lategame setup ready whenever there's a midgame advantage. But I'd really like being able to play lategame too. | ||
|
UncleClimax
18 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games summit1g12210 WinterStarcraft334 C9.Mang0311 Cr1tdota228 Maynarde110 Fuzer  88NeuroSwarm80 ViBE44 Mew2King21 ROOTIllusion15 |
|
The PondCast
KCM Race Survival
OSC
IntoTheTV X SOOP
Reynor vs Solar
ByuN vs SHIN
Clem vs MaxPax
herO vs Rogue
IPSL
WorsT vs nOmaD
Dewalt vs andersOn
AI Arena Tournament
IntoTheTV X SOOP
IPSL
Azhi_Dahaki vs ggnore13
Double vs WIZARD
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
