|
United States33077 Posts
Original post: Blizzard
Hey everyone,
Last week we released a community update talking about our thoughts on the state of the game as well as some proposed changes along with our reasoning. As it was released a few hours after the patch notes themselves, we suspect some may have missed these notes, and we urge everyone to check them out before continuing. With that in mind, here are some small adjustments we’d like to make to our initial proposals.
Baneling
Previously Proposed Change:
• Baneling weapon damage changed from 18 (+17 vs light) to 15 (+20 vs light).
New Change:
• Baneling weapon damage changed from 18 (+17 vs light) to 16 (+19 vs light).
This tweak achieves most of what we were going for in PvZ while, at the same time, preserving the interaction between unupgraded Banelings in ZvZ.
Void Ray
Previously Proposed Change:
• Flux Vanes movement speed increased from 4.65 to 5.11.
One of the core thoughts we expressed from our last update was as follows:
“…what we hear from many top Protoss players is that the late game unit interactions between the two races are not inherently lopsided, especially after changes to Feedback. (In fact, there are players from both sides who believe it is Protoss favored.) Rather, there’s an agreement that the primary problem with late game is the difficulty of getting there on equal footing with the Zerg…”
As our primary goal of this patch is to improve interactions surrounding mid game PvZ, we’d like to further focus our Void Ray changes around those that are targeted towards that stage of the game and thus will be removing the additional increase to movement speed we had initially planned with the Flux Vanes upgrade.
Conclusion
By the time this blog goes up, these changes will have been updated on the Balance Test Mod for players to practice on. Barring bug fixes, these will be the final changes reflected in the next balance patch, which is currently scheduled to be released next week.
Below is the complete list of changes:
ZERG
- Baneling
- Baneling weapon damage changed from 18 (+17 vs light) to 16 (+19 vs light).
PROTOSS
- Oracle
- Revelation duration increased from 15 seconds to 20 seconds.
- Void Ray
- Cost decreased from 250/150 to 200/150.
- Void Ray build time decreased from 43 to 37 seconds.
- Movement speed increased from 3.5 to 3.85.
- Carrier
- Interceptors belonging to a Carrier that has been Neural Parasited will no longer draw aggression from units belonging to the Carrier’s original owner.
Tempest- New upgrade found on the Fleet Beacon: Tectonic Destabilizers
- Effect: Improves the Tempest's Resonance Coil to deal +40 damage vs structures.
- Cost: 150/150.
- Research time: 100 seconds.
|
I don't understand, the balance team is supposed to listen to pros and to have regular interaction with them. And they seem to say that PvZ is in a good place at the moment. Why are they pushing it at the moment ? I don't understand...
If the goal is to create a more fun gameplay then buffing airtoss definitely doesn't seem the right answer.
If the goal is to create balance between win rates at the pro level, they will need to push their changes again and some more if they want to have competitive series between Reynor and Goblin on a daily basis or Serral and Hurricane (no insult at all to Goblin and Hurricane who are great players, they are just not in the same category as the two juggernauts above)...
And the last balance patch was really not so long ago... I don't get this patch, at all.
|
On August 15 2020 05:14 Waxangel wrote:Original post: Blizzard
Previously Proposed Change: • Baneling weapon damage changed from 18 (+17 vs light) to 15 (+20 vs light).New Change: • Baneling weapon damage changed from 18 (+17 vs light) to 16 (+19 vs light). This tweak achieves most of what we were going for in PvZ while, at the same time, preserving the interaction between unupgraded Banelings in ZvZ.
i doubt that this would change anything just like the previous baneling change. If we still see mass banelings on ZvP/T then they really need to redesign the unit.
|
On August 15 2020 05:41 NicolasJohnson wrote:
I don't understand, the balance team is supposed to listen to pros and to have regular interaction with them. And they seem to say that PvZ is in a good place at the moment. Why are they pushing it at the moment ? I don't understand...
If the goal is to create a more fun gameplay then buffing airtoss definitely doesn't seem the right answer.
If the goal is to create balance between win rates at the pro level, they will need to push their changes again and some more if they want to have competitive series between Reynor and Goblin on a daily basis or Serral and Hurricane (no insult at all to Goblin and Hurricane who are great players, they are just not in the same category as the two juggernauts above)...
And the last balance patch was really not so long ago... I don't get this patch, at all.
They do talk to pros and the feedback they got about PvZ is not that "PvZ is in a good place at the moment".
If you look at https://starcraft2.com/en-us/news/23495671 the feedback they got was that:
Ultimately though, the last patch has not produced the lasting impact to ZvP winrates that we had hoped, and most of the feedback we currently receive about this matchup from professional-level Protoss players remains similar to what we had received before, just to a slightly lesser degree.
|
glad mutas are still viable in all vT matchups :angry:
|
On August 15 2020 05:41 NicolasJohnson wrote:
I don't understand, the balance team is supposed to listen to pros and to have regular interaction with them. And they seem to say that PvZ is in a good place at the moment. Why are they pushing it at the moment ? I don't understand...
If the goal is to create a more fun gameplay then buffing airtoss definitely doesn't seem the right answer.
If the goal is to create balance between win rates at the pro level, they will need to push their changes again and some more if they want to have competitive series between Reynor and Goblin on a daily basis or Serral and Hurricane (no insult at all to Goblin and Hurricane who are great players, they are just not in the same category as the two juggernauts above)...
And the last balance patch was really not so long ago... I don't get this patch, at all.
Hurricane 2-0'd Serral earlier this year before the last patch nerfing Z. Serral is better sure but Hurricane is good enough to beat anybody and in a balanced game would have a solid 30% or so winrrate vs Zergs like Serral.
|
It seems way more reasonnable, good job !
|
|
|
The problem for Protoss trying to go macro in all matchups is the same.
Because of the cost of Protoss buildings, units and upgrades and the slow buildtime , whenever protoss goes macro builds they get stretched thin on defense and whatever harass they go for with their macro build is easily deflected(a single poking oracle or 2 adepts usually).
As soon as a T or a Z identifies a macro build from Protoss in the early game they can passively get ahead just by how the races are designed.
One example is PVT, Protoss that goes straight up macro will have to deflect various very dangerous types of harass which we all know is very difficult at the moment, even when the protoss knows of possible hellion drop they cant kill the hellions fast enough because stalkers is the only answer and they take forever to kill a hellion.
Another problem is Terrans have so many different variations of timing attacks against macro Protoss thirds, so if you prepare your best to deflect harassment you will be lacking on army supply if you set up to defend against possible harass.
Protoss are full walling against Terrans now even on 2 base to compensate for how weak the Protoss is early game at deflecting hellions.
And even after all of this , if the protoss deflects and Terran went macro behind the harass a macro protoss cant punish the terran since protoss went macro, so the game turns to being on even footing when protoss deserves a lead in the match. I have noticed a lot of people say will say "Oh protoss is in a good position now" , what they should be saying is he survived and he has a shot at the match. He is not ahead, the match is even and this is frustrating to watch.
If you want a more fun TVP matchup you have to make Terrans pay for all their various cheesy harass openings they can do without much risk of punishment if they fail. This will encourage Terrans to go for macro builds and create a meta based around macro openings. I am personally tired of watching T suicide units into P worker lines to get easy auto win games.
The solution to this is buff Protoss early game so they can get into midgames stronger which in turn will stop zerg from being so greedy because they cant get away with scouting a Protoss macro build and get 90 free drones.
A stronger protoss early game would also make Terran harass easier to defend (which it should be, if you know somethings comin and you still take damage at Pro level something is obviously very wrong).
This would make Terrans have to do some serious all in builds if they wanted to kill protoss by workers and if they didnt kill enough they would be in the same shoes as a Protoss would be.You are really behind, as you should be. But as of right now Terrans are getting away with murder.
This would promote macro builds from Terrans because they cant get free wins with low risk builds.
I am so convinced Protoss weakness in the early game is linked to so many of the problems with the gamplay of protoss because it is laughable how weak it is compared to T and Z and the meta/gameplay is getting shaped around it.
When Immortal all inns were said to be unstoppable even when scouted, Zergs proved us and themselves wrong when they learned to hold it consistently, and still after the build was falling off they still went through with a huge nerf on protoss.
Where is this logic now when you see protoss consistently struggle and lose in the same ways over and over even when they know somethings coming.
Protoss has been shorthanded for the entirety of SC2 history because it is the most hated race because we are forced to outsmart you and be sneaky.
Watch the last Pylon show , they said the exact same thing.
It's time to redesign the Protoss race to stop having to really on the enemy making mistakes and reward players like stats who really masters the game of SC2. Buffing void ray and nerfing baneling by 1 damage is not gonna change this.
|
On August 15 2020 09:15 Dedraterllaerau wrote:
The problem for Protoss trying to go macro in all matchups is the same.
Because of the cost of Protoss buildings, units and upgrades and the slow buildtime , whenever protoss goes macro builds they get stretched thin on defense and whatever harass they go for with their macro build is easily deflected(a single poking oracle or 2 adepts usually).
As soon as a T or a Z identifies a macro build from Protoss in the early game they can passively get ahead just by how the races are designed.
One example is PVT, Protoss that goes straight up macro will have to deflect various very dangerous types of harass which we all know is very difficult at the moment, even when the protoss knows of possible hellion drop they cant kill the hellions fast enough because stalkers is the only answer and they take forever to kill a hellion.
Another problem is Terrans have so many different variations of timing attacks against macro Protoss thirds, so if you prepare your best to deflect harassment you will be lacking on army supply if you set up to defend against possible harass.
Protoss are full walling against Terrans now even on 2 base to compensate for how weak the Protoss is early game at deflecting hellions.
And even after all of this , if the protoss deflects and Terran went macro behind the harass a macro protoss cant punish the terran since protoss went macro, so the game turns to being on even footing when protoss deserves a lead in the match. I have noticed a lot of people say will say "Oh protoss is in a good position now" , what they should be saying is he survived and he has a shot at the match. He is not ahead, the match is even and this is frustrating to watch.
If you want a more fun TVP matchup you have to make Terrans pay for all their various cheesy harass openings they can do without much risk of punishment if they fail. This will encourage Terrans to go for macro builds and create a meta based around macro openings. I am personally tired of watching T suicide units into P worker lines to get easy auto win games.
The solution to this is buff Protoss early game so they can get into midgames stronger which in turn will stop zerg from being so greedy because they cant get away with scouting a Protoss macro build and get 90 free drones.
A stronger protoss early game would also make Terran harass easier to defend (which it should be, if you know somethings comin and you still take damage at Pro level something is obviously very wrong).
This would make Terrans have to do some serious all in builds if they wanted to kill protoss by workers and if they didnt kill enough they would be in the same shoes as a Protoss would be.You are really behind, as you should be. But as of right now Terrans are getting away with murder.
This would promote macro builds from Terrans because they cant get free wins with low risk builds.
I am so convinced Protoss weakness in the early game is linked to so many of the problems with the gamplay of protoss because it is laughable how weak it is compared to T and Z and the meta/gameplay is getting shaped around it.
When Immortal all inns were said to be unstoppable even when scouted, Zergs proved us and themselves wrong when they learned to hold it consistently, and still after the build was falling off they still went through with a huge nerf on protoss.
Where is this logic now when you see protoss consistently struggle and lose in the same ways over and over even when they know somethings coming.
Protoss has been shorthanded for the entirety of SC2 history because it is the most hated race because we are forced to outsmart you and be sneaky.
Watch the last Pylon show , they said the exact same thing.
It's time to redesign the Protoss race to stop having to really on the enemy making mistakes and reward players like stats who really masters the game of SC2. Buffing void ray and nerfing baneling by 1 damage is not gonna change this.
It's the removal of the msc that caused most of this. Msc allowed for protoss to be out on the map and also defend at home in a balanced way.
Protoss has been a hot pile of mess ever since. Battery doesn't even come close to fixing toss issues.
|
On August 15 2020 09:30 LTCM wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2020 09:15 Dedraterllaerau wrote:
The problem for Protoss trying to go macro in all matchups is the same.
Because of the cost of Protoss buildings, units and upgrades and the slow buildtime , whenever protoss goes macro builds they get stretched thin on defense and whatever harass they go for with their macro build is easily deflected(a single poking oracle or 2 adepts usually).
As soon as a T or a Z identifies a macro build from Protoss in the early game they can passively get ahead just by how the races are designed.
One example is PVT, Protoss that goes straight up macro will have to deflect various very dangerous types of harass which we all know is very difficult at the moment, even when the protoss knows of possible hellion drop they cant kill the hellions fast enough because stalkers is the only answer and they take forever to kill a hellion.
Another problem is Terrans have so many different variations of timing attacks against macro Protoss thirds, so if you prepare your best to deflect harassment you will be lacking on army supply if you set up to defend against possible harass.
Protoss are full walling against Terrans now even on 2 base to compensate for how weak the Protoss is early game at deflecting hellions.
And even after all of this , if the protoss deflects and Terran went macro behind the harass a macro protoss cant punish the terran since protoss went macro, so the game turns to being on even footing when protoss deserves a lead in the match. I have noticed a lot of people say will say "Oh protoss is in a good position now" , what they should be saying is he survived and he has a shot at the match. He is not ahead, the match is even and this is frustrating to watch.
If you want a more fun TVP matchup you have to make Terrans pay for all their various cheesy harass openings they can do without much risk of punishment if they fail. This will encourage Terrans to go for macro builds and create a meta based around macro openings. I am personally tired of watching T suicide units into P worker lines to get easy auto win games.
The solution to this is buff Protoss early game so they can get into midgames stronger which in turn will stop zerg from being so greedy because they cant get away with scouting a Protoss macro build and get 90 free drones.
A stronger protoss early game would also make Terran harass easier to defend (which it should be, if you know somethings comin and you still take damage at Pro level something is obviously very wrong).
This would make Terrans have to do some serious all in builds if they wanted to kill protoss by workers and if they didnt kill enough they would be in the same shoes as a Protoss would be.You are really behind, as you should be. But as of right now Terrans are getting away with murder.
This would promote macro builds from Terrans because they cant get free wins with low risk builds.
I am so convinced Protoss weakness in the early game is linked to so many of the problems with the gamplay of protoss because it is laughable how weak it is compared to T and Z and the meta/gameplay is getting shaped around it.
When Immortal all inns were said to be unstoppable even when scouted, Zergs proved us and themselves wrong when they learned to hold it consistently, and still after the build was falling off they still went through with a huge nerf on protoss.
Where is this logic now when you see protoss consistently struggle and lose in the same ways over and over even when they know somethings coming.
Protoss has been shorthanded for the entirety of SC2 history because it is the most hated race because we are forced to outsmart you and be sneaky.
Watch the last Pylon show , they said the exact same thing.
It's time to redesign the Protoss race to stop having to really on the enemy making mistakes and reward players like stats who really masters the game of SC2. Buffing void ray and nerfing baneling by 1 damage is not gonna change this. It's the removal of the msc that caused most of this. Msc allowed for protoss to be out on the map and also defend at home in a balanced way. Protoss has been a hot pile of mess ever since. Battery doesn't even come close to fixing toss issues.
Toss issues is just getting steamrolled by wise extra banelings and then not being able to, off their 3rd, going into a 4th, contest the 5th-6th base v Z. At my level that just means they get to play sloppy in a big army engagement 1 or more times before the game gets even, whereas I need to play crisp, and if I play sloppy once, it's game over. This is a great issue to see resolved to a greater extent.
My own void-ray inspired Pandora's box aside, templar are fantastic to use, and they can't win in a fight against 1 marine without casting a storm, which I find hilarious.
Protoss don't have an issues. They're a majestic race so big they have extra knees.
|
Change the units according to the MU, nobody cares about more than 2 players in a game anyway.
|
On August 15 2020 09:30 LTCM wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2020 09:15 Dedraterllaerau wrote:
The problem for Protoss trying to go macro in all matchups is the same.
Because of the cost of Protoss buildings, units and upgrades and the slow buildtime , whenever protoss goes macro builds they get stretched thin on defense and whatever harass they go for with their macro build is easily deflected(a single poking oracle or 2 adepts usually).
As soon as a T or a Z identifies a macro build from Protoss in the early game they can passively get ahead just by how the races are designed.
One example is PVT, Protoss that goes straight up macro will have to deflect various very dangerous types of harass which we all know is very difficult at the moment, even when the protoss knows of possible hellion drop they cant kill the hellions fast enough because stalkers is the only answer and they take forever to kill a hellion.
Another problem is Terrans have so many different variations of timing attacks against macro Protoss thirds, so if you prepare your best to deflect harassment you will be lacking on army supply if you set up to defend against possible harass.
Protoss are full walling against Terrans now even on 2 base to compensate for how weak the Protoss is early game at deflecting hellions.
And even after all of this , if the protoss deflects and Terran went macro behind the harass a macro protoss cant punish the terran since protoss went macro, so the game turns to being on even footing when protoss deserves a lead in the match. I have noticed a lot of people say will say "Oh protoss is in a good position now" , what they should be saying is he survived and he has a shot at the match. He is not ahead, the match is even and this is frustrating to watch.
If you want a more fun TVP matchup you have to make Terrans pay for all their various cheesy harass openings they can do without much risk of punishment if they fail. This will encourage Terrans to go for macro builds and create a meta based around macro openings. I am personally tired of watching T suicide units into P worker lines to get easy auto win games.
The solution to this is buff Protoss early game so they can get into midgames stronger which in turn will stop zerg from being so greedy because they cant get away with scouting a Protoss macro build and get 90 free drones.
A stronger protoss early game would also make Terran harass easier to defend (which it should be, if you know somethings comin and you still take damage at Pro level something is obviously very wrong).
This would make Terrans have to do some serious all in builds if they wanted to kill protoss by workers and if they didnt kill enough they would be in the same shoes as a Protoss would be.You are really behind, as you should be. But as of right now Terrans are getting away with murder.
This would promote macro builds from Terrans because they cant get free wins with low risk builds.
I am so convinced Protoss weakness in the early game is linked to so many of the problems with the gamplay of protoss because it is laughable how weak it is compared to T and Z and the meta/gameplay is getting shaped around it.
When Immortal all inns were said to be unstoppable even when scouted, Zergs proved us and themselves wrong when they learned to hold it consistently, and still after the build was falling off they still went through with a huge nerf on protoss.
Where is this logic now when you see protoss consistently struggle and lose in the same ways over and over even when they know somethings coming.
Protoss has been shorthanded for the entirety of SC2 history because it is the most hated race because we are forced to outsmart you and be sneaky.
Watch the last Pylon show , they said the exact same thing.
It's time to redesign the Protoss race to stop having to really on the enemy making mistakes and reward players like stats who really masters the game of SC2. Buffing void ray and nerfing baneling by 1 damage is not gonna change this. It's the removal of the msc that caused most of this. Msc allowed for protoss to be out on the map and also defend at home in a balanced way. Protoss has been a hot pile of mess ever since. Battery doesn't even come close to fixing toss issues.
The msc has its flaw but I prefer it to batteries too even if a majority seems to disagree.
|
It's a shame they went back on the speedy ray bois. Even if Toss would be, lets say, 2% better at the late game stage than Zerg, would that really be that bad?
TvZ has an explosive late game, because Zerg can't compete with Terran mining when at 200 supply, so they have to keep throwing away units to keep the Terran mining low(below 4 bases.) If Protoss is more efficient late game, then we'd see something similar. That's way more exciting than the flip side case, which is Protoss spending all of their actions to try and achieve a Spore Crawler kill, then rinse and repeat.
I also think further nerfing Zerg vs Terran is a scary territory, which is another reason why it's better to change units that are more prominent in PvZ, rather than the Baneling which sees play everywhere.
Like how will Zerg actually deal with Marauders? You don't need that many Tanks to make Hydralisk not the best option, we know how quickly Thors shoot Broodlords out of the sky, so if not the Baneling, then what actually deals with Marauders? Ultras?, I guess that can work, but when Terran supply is high and the army is together and not caught off guard, Ultras can quickly become quite bad as well.
|
Mexico2170 Posts
This just shows to me blizzard doesn't understand or don't want to see the problem.
I read the reasoning behind the VR buff, they want to make it easier to clear creepy and overords. Does blizzard really think that's the problem in pvz? Really?
The fundamental problem is the lotv economy. Who would have thought that reducing the ammount of minerals and forcing you to expand (use more resources to set up more expansions) would hurt the race with the most expensive units the most, and favor the race that can more easily expand the most?
Apart from that, which I know they won't change at this point, the problem is Zerg can just expand like crazy and there's no way to stop it. Baneling nerfs won't help either because of that.
Zerg players have learned to deal with harass so it's less effective now. You only kill like 4, drones and meanwhile the Zerg is making 7 behind it. There's no easy way for Protoss to deny expansions either. And after the harass the Zerg ends up with about as good as an army as yours.
Protists units in general need a buff. No one will use VR as long as they are a worse immortal that only is good for 10 seconds. Make it's base stack better vs light and the other one better vs armored.
Buff in general the proposed army so it's easier to stack the Zerg and deny expansion, and force them to make actual army sacrificing drone economy and not just 5 queens and some ling's.
Buff protoss harass options so they are more effective as they simply do nothing worthwhile anymore.
Pick one or two of the above suggestions. The real solution would be to change Zerg economy but we all know they won't do that, but nerfing the banking a little bit won't do anything as the problem is not the baneling itself but the amount of things Zerg can do with their untouchable economy in the early/mid. And for the last time, no, VR won't do anything when the Zerg can just make 20 hydras in one minute.
|
On August 15 2020 09:30 LTCM wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2020 09:15 Dedraterllaerau wrote:
The problem for Protoss trying to go macro in all matchups is the same.
Because of the cost of Protoss buildings, units and upgrades and the slow buildtime , whenever protoss goes macro builds they get stretched thin on defense and whatever harass they go for with their macro build is easily deflected(a single poking oracle or 2 adepts usually).
As soon as a T or a Z identifies a macro build from Protoss in the early game they can passively get ahead just by how the races are designed.
One example is PVT, Protoss that goes straight up macro will have to deflect various very dangerous types of harass which we all know is very difficult at the moment, even when the protoss knows of possible hellion drop they cant kill the hellions fast enough because stalkers is the only answer and they take forever to kill a hellion.
Another problem is Terrans have so many different variations of timing attacks against macro Protoss thirds, so if you prepare your best to deflect harassment you will be lacking on army supply if you set up to defend against possible harass.
Protoss are full walling against Terrans now even on 2 base to compensate for how weak the Protoss is early game at deflecting hellions.
And even after all of this , if the protoss deflects and Terran went macro behind the harass a macro protoss cant punish the terran since protoss went macro, so the game turns to being on even footing when protoss deserves a lead in the match. I have noticed a lot of people say will say "Oh protoss is in a good position now" , what they should be saying is he survived and he has a shot at the match. He is not ahead, the match is even and this is frustrating to watch.
If you want a more fun TVP matchup you have to make Terrans pay for all their various cheesy harass openings they can do without much risk of punishment if they fail. This will encourage Terrans to go for macro builds and create a meta based around macro openings. I am personally tired of watching T suicide units into P worker lines to get easy auto win games.
The solution to this is buff Protoss early game so they can get into midgames stronger which in turn will stop zerg from being so greedy because they cant get away with scouting a Protoss macro build and get 90 free drones.
A stronger protoss early game would also make Terran harass easier to defend (which it should be, if you know somethings comin and you still take damage at Pro level something is obviously very wrong).
This would make Terrans have to do some serious all in builds if they wanted to kill protoss by workers and if they didnt kill enough they would be in the same shoes as a Protoss would be.You are really behind, as you should be. But as of right now Terrans are getting away with murder.
This would promote macro builds from Terrans because they cant get free wins with low risk builds.
I am so convinced Protoss weakness in the early game is linked to so many of the problems with the gamplay of protoss because it is laughable how weak it is compared to T and Z and the meta/gameplay is getting shaped around it.
When Immortal all inns were said to be unstoppable even when scouted, Zergs proved us and themselves wrong when they learned to hold it consistently, and still after the build was falling off they still went through with a huge nerf on protoss.
Where is this logic now when you see protoss consistently struggle and lose in the same ways over and over even when they know somethings coming.
Protoss has been shorthanded for the entirety of SC2 history because it is the most hated race because we are forced to outsmart you and be sneaky.
Watch the last Pylon show , they said the exact same thing.
It's time to redesign the Protoss race to stop having to really on the enemy making mistakes and reward players like stats who really masters the game of SC2. Buffing void ray and nerfing baneling by 1 damage is not gonna change this. It's the removal of the msc that caused most of this. Msc allowed for protoss to be out on the map and also defend at home in a balanced way. Protoss has been a hot pile of mess ever since. Battery doesn't even come close to fixing toss issues.
I hate to say it because I don't like the mothership core, but I agree. Without it, protoss currently has no chance of map control against zerg in the early game and even scouting is risky.
GSL spoilers:
+ Show Spoiler +People will criticize that last game Stats played against Rogue, but really, what he lost to is something every protoss has lost to at some point. Protoss map awareness before the 5 minute mark is basically non-existent so everything ends up being a risk, even the most benign of openers like 1 or 2 adept harass. Stats didn't have his wall blocked right, but even if he had, Rogue would have started busting his wall down since warpgate wasn't done and Stats had no units to defend. At the same time, Rogue also knew that Stats moved out so he made enough units to easily defend while harassing. Stats was basically in a catch-22 where either he slows down Rogue while gaining intel but leave himself in danger at home, or not harass/scout Rogue, who could potentially be all-inning him or droning hard. Stats had no way of knowing that Rogue was doing while Rogue was fully aware of what was happening on Stats' side of the map.
The point I'm making is that for the good zerg players, we're at the point where there is essentially no danger before the 5 minute mark or so outside of cheeses like cannon rushes. There are no other builds protoss can do that can pressure zerg effectively, let alone kill them. At this point, zerg essentially has to screw up for protoss to do any damage. On the other hand, there are many different builds right now that can outright kill protoss before 5 minutes, some of which are very difficult to scout, and most of which require completely different responses. It's reasonable for the level of risk for each race to be asymmetrical at different parts of the game, but in this case it's so heavily skewed that we've ended up with a situation where one race has to play safe against a race they literally can't afford to play safe against. The only other option is to play risky and end up with what amount to build order losses on occasion.
At the same time, pressure builds at the 5-8 minute mark also no longer work.
GSL spoilers:
+ Show Spoiler +We saw yet again that the adept glaive build has been solved by zerg. Rogue did exactly what every zerg who has held it did, which is make a ton of units, shut down the warp prism, then counterattack the third and win. We saw a whole pile of games that looked exactly like that this season.
Rogue also did one of the textbook solutions to the double stargate phoenix opener. In his case he went for extra hatches then hydra busted Stats, who had invested so much in phoenixes he had nothing else to defend. The other counter we saw was mass queens into nydus, which also worked well and leveled Patience. I can't think of a single instance of this double stargate strategy winning this season but this is where it's at with protoss. Do a pressure build and hope zerg screws up.
So essentially, we're at the point where protoss either all-ins or plays hyper-defensive and goes for a later timing. The former is what most protoss players are doing because the latter is incredibly difficult and allows the zerg to get a massive economic lead and/or allows them to go for their own timings that can outright kill protoss.
Tweaking void rays and banelings will not solve this problem. It may temporarily for a month or two but it's likely we'll be back at this point quite soon again anyway. It's going to take much more than that to solve these fundamental issues. The base gateway units are too bad at dealing with the volume of stuff zerg can make in the early game and zerg production/economy scales so fast that even with interruptions it often ends up being superior to both of the other races. At the same time, zerg's economy is much more resilient to losses compared the others since injects tend to scale much better later into the game than either chronoboost or MULEs. A protoss or terran losing a mineral line of workers early in the game against zerg is usually game-ending but for zerg it's a setback, not a likely loss. We've seen tons of games where the zerg loses a bunch of drones, the protoss or terran take one bad fight, and then suddenly the game is even or zerg is in the lead.
I honestly think it will take something on the level of nerfing injects and then buffing zerg units to compensate for there being less of them for things to change. The advantage of zerg's production compounds so quickly right now that it's very difficult for either of the other races to keep up. But this type of solution is just in line with many others people have suggested that basically recommend slowing the game down and making the units sturdier so entire battles aren't done in 10 seconds.
|
"So essentially, we're at the point where protoss either all-ins or plays hyper-defensive and goes for a later timing."
You say that like we haven't been there since 2010.
|
I think Protoss needs a new unit at the gateway level. Something that offers immediate early game threat and map control, similar to hellions. I'm pretty sure this is what adepts were intended for, but it's quite clear they fail at this role.
I think PvT is in a decent place, especially with the new DT blink strategies. But PvZ is looking pretty one sided and I don't think simple damage nerfs can fix it.
Edit: Thinking about it some more, I think the biggest problem with PvZ is that gateway units lose to zerglings until you get archons.
|
Below is purely a spectator point of view.
The way terran keeps the early zerg econ in check is the explosiveness of the harass. Hellions, liberators, mines, battlecruisers and even banshees just kill units, even when there is a zerg reaction. I'd like to call it frontloaded damage, where they can get several kills with relatively low commitment if they reach their destination. They also trade against most zerg units in a reasonable manner, even when terran is forced to use them in less than optimal situations.
In the meanwhile Protoss can open with adepts, oracles or phoenix as the early offensive options. Oracles and phoenixes just appear to trade too poorly vs the zerg early defences for how high the protoss commitment to them is. Zerg can throw down a spore per base and a few utility queens running about already render the stargate units very inefficient quite quickly. Then the stargate units just do not do have the same utility in defending the zerg counterattack or supporting the protoss follow-up in the same way as the terran opening options would. Simply the terran equivalents just have more synergy with the terran follow-ups. Adepts as people pointed out are being figured out and it may not be preferred anyways to buff the unit that is already used mostly in a very all-in manner.
Other frontloaded damage in protoss comes from DT's, Immortals and Disruptors. All of these are further out in the tech tree, expensive and weak to getting swarmed by just zerglings. Immortals and disruptors seem to be in a reasonable spot for what they are supposed to do, but suffer from being expensive and slow to replace if caught and killed. DTs are in fashion in lategame PvT (and PvP), showing the usefulness of frontloaded damage. Jumping into where the army is not, kill a base, jump out. No idea would they be similarly useful in lategame PvZ because we don't get to see those games right now. These three units synergise a lot better with the mid to lategame protoss armies, but cannot be opened with.
I think there are two ways to go about it, and neither of them is about void ray speed...
A) redesign the protoss early game units in a way where they transition better to a natural midgame. Stargate units are too pigeon-holed (this is where void ray could actually be a thing, as it is the only one with both air and ground attacks before fleet beacon!) and they don't feel like a natural part of the midgame protoss army (in PvZ at least, phoenixes lifting tanks/killing medivacs etc have some utility in TvP). It takes too long for the air units to deal meaningful damage to the zerg ground armies, essentially protoss does not have the equivalent of panic banshee/liberator, where you have a harassment unit that can meaningfully contribute to defending early zerg aggression. Void ray could be that, but the offensive potential of void ray just isn't good enough.
GSL spoiler
+ Show Spoiler +The Golden Wall game of Rogue v Stats was a brilliant example, phoenixes just do not have utility vs ground based zerg armies. No tanks or mines to pick up, no medivacs to chase. 20+ dead supply and expenditure on units that did not have a meaningful way to interact with the zerg army.
Problems with this may be PvT spillovers if the interactions with terran units change too much.
B) Queens (and banes? and spores?) do less shield damage. Just apply a hammer approach to it. Not elegant, but could maybe just do it. Force zerg to do more to defend against the early harassment options. Spend larva for units, make more spores, spines, anything. Oracles, phoenixes, adepts can kill a few more drones each time. Could allow protosses to enter the midgame on a more even footing if zergs have less larva/expansions/drones/bank, avoiding getting outexpanded and swarmed each time they move out.
|
On August 16 2020 02:14 InfCereal wrote:
"So essentially, we're at the point where protoss either all-ins or plays hyper-defensive and goes for a later timing."
You say that like we haven't been there since 2010.
For a while the last couple years there was at least something resembling a middle-ground, but that's not the case anymore. What pressure builds that allow expanding behind them are left that work? Double oracle doesn't work, neither do archon drops or harass with 6-8 glaive adepts. At best with any of these, a few workers might die, but seldom is enough damage done to justify the cost.
On August 16 2020 02:20 Monochromatic wrote:
I think Protoss needs a new unit at the gateway level. Something that offers immediate early game threat and map control, similar to hellions. I'm pretty sure this is what adepts were intended for, but it's quite clear they fail at this role.
I think PvT is in a decent place, especially with the new DT blink strategies. But PvZ is looking pretty one sided and I don't think simple damage nerfs can fix it.
Edit: Thinking about it some more, I think the biggest problem with PvZ is that gateway units lose to zerglings until you get archons.
This is in line with my thinking too. Terran has several accessible early options that can deal with a large number of zerglings, be it units with splash like hellions or marines, which attack quickly. Protoss doesn't have this until either archons or some form of teching is done, which is severely limiting. All of the gateway units attack one unit at a time and attack slowly, making them easy to overwhelm. It's why those 3 minute ling flood builds have been so successful as of late.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
