|
On August 28 2011 17:18 firehand101 wrote:I love how blizz has taken something and added something to each race, makes everyone happy That is the most wonderfully sublime comment I've ever read. Bravo
|
On August 27 2011 06:09 rmAmnesiac wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 04:48 Shadrak wrote:On August 27 2011 01:17 rmAmnesiac wrote:On August 26 2011 22:16 Shadrak wrote:On August 26 2011 21:53 sleepingdog wrote:On August 26 2011 21:35 rmAmnesiac wrote: rofl. the requirements of being a blue poster. yes maybe i am biased like most people but you've shown yourself to be just as biased in that post. 'Terrans can cast 2-3 EMPs, stim and roflstomp protoss easily.' you're understanding of t vs p in particular is fantastic! perhaps i can suggest you actually learn to play random and all races at a competent level before making huge assumptions about skill levels and how overpowered the terran race is.
also, i guess i am out order to question this theory that terran has dominated indefinitely, and i'm supposed to accept it as fact because a biased protoss says so? am i not entitled to question this theory that because korean terran pros can dominate at high level, terran is therefore overperforming at all levels, and these nerfs are totally justified at all levels of play and for players like me? is there any evidence whatsoever that myself as a measely 500 rated masters terran deserves these huge nerfs?
Do you "really" think that insulting me will help your point? For the statistics I suggest looking here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=252090People that follow the scene for a longer time don't question the fact that terran has always been the most succesful race - I don't even know why you would try to argue about that. Furthermore, you claimed - without any factual evidence - that zerg/protoss could just a-move and win, while terrans had to "outplay". Therefore I provided the example that terran a-move can also be very effective, if you EMP the whole protoss-ball beforehand. Every race has compositions that are able to win fights with pure a-moves if the opponent doesn't respond correctly. Overall, you just QQ that your race gets a little worse without providing any usuful input for discussion at all. We are supposed to discuss the individual changes here, not whine because we just don't like them. Those images pretty much sum up why this patch makes sense. Z is dominating ZvP with infestors, so they get nerfed. T is dominating in general so they get a broad nerf. Both of these changes seems pretty reasonable to me (I play Z). rofl you sure know how to answer a persons actual point. unofficial stats relating to the very highest level of play. fantastic and wholly unrepresentative. also, i never said protoss and zerg are a move races but i don't think it is unreasonable to suggest that terran is the race which scales best with very high levels of micro and multitasking ability, which yes is needed pretty in pretty much any bio related compisitions. i can think of A LOT of zerg and protoss units which perform optimally without micro. from a terran arsenal there is? thors? well not against protoss anyway. Who are you talking to? Yourself? the concept of quoting a post which you are responding to really isn't a difficult one. perhaps learn to engage your brain?
Read what I wrote and what he responded to. He is talking about stuff I never even said.
|
He was kinda being an idiot in his thing about unnofical stats relating to the very highest level of play.
It's admitted that balance is different between levels of play. Imba in pro levels is related to actual abilities and dps of units, while imba in pre diamond is closely related to the "Less micro more imba". The magic area of diamond to med masters is the area where these two concepts collide, hence why you hear much more "this is imba" from that range and intelligent arguments presented to support their arguments, cause honestly, some things are imba in that range when taken on a case by case basis.
If you can't balance everyone, balance to the highest point. Balancing to the highest point makes small differences in the overall scheme of things. Balancing to the lowest or the medium can cause a huge issue in the other skill levels.
|
On August 28 2011 11:43 ScythedBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 11:17 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:On August 28 2011 10:38 rpgalon wrote:chargelot is A-move, but you have to always put then on front of the stalkers/sentries, colossus need to always be behind the army, every move command you do, you have to put then in their correct positions, it is something terran does not need to do when they go MMM. the difference between MMM, that don't matter from where you attack and a standard protoss army that has front, middle and "rear", is huge, and have already caused the defeat of many professionals because they were caught by surprise. EDIT: On August 28 2011 09:43 Griffith` wrote: One of the things I fucking hate about the raven is the amount of research upgrades it needs to be viable:
Consider Auto-Turrets:
Durable Materials (Lasts Longer) Building Armor (+2 Building Armor) Hi-Sec Auto Tracking (+1 Range) Raven Energy
Consider HSM:
HSM Research Raven Energy
Consider PDD:
Hi-Sec Auto Tracking (+1 Range) Raven Energy Durable Materials (Lasts Longer) Building Armor (+2 Building Armor)
In other words, for a raven to fully utilize its potential, the terran player needs to spend
800 Minerals and 900 Gas
LOL lol, a zealot to utilize it full potential takes 200/200 charge 525/525 ground weapons +1 +2 +3 525/525 ground armor +1 +2 +3 900/900 plasma shields +1 +2 +3 2150/2150 OMFG!!! .... You're whining about the fact that you have to put zealots in front of stalkers? And colossus in the back?Are you freaking serious? Terran is forced to get perfect concaves vs toss, and you whine because you have to do a little unit positioning? And please, stop crying about utilizing full zealot potential. That applies for every damn unit in the game, and while Zerg and Terran have 2 upgrade paths for ground units, you only have one. 1) Stop whining 2) Yes, ravens could be considered pretty bad, but do realize that they are detector-spellcasters. This is why it is hard to equalize ravens. 3) Toss micro takes a lot harder than terran micro. What you have to do is make sure your vikings don't get raped too much before they rape the collosi. However, you shuld never have a problem if each ghosts' EMP was probably as good as each Protoss's Storm. In fact, you should be owning Toss armies if you do get EMPS off at the same skill level as the Protoss's storm. The proper option for toss is then to usually not engage, because its not worth it at that point then.
Good points. However in point 3, follow point 1. Its obviously not true, and you are clearly just trying to get a response.
And at whoever was saying something about the 1-1-1. Watch mlg. Hero just 3 gate pressured and rolled it. Hard.
|
On August 28 2011 11:29 Squigly wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 11:17 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:On August 28 2011 10:38 rpgalon wrote:chargelot is A-move, but you have to always put then on front of the stalkers/sentries, colossus need to always be behind the army, every move command you do, you have to put then in their correct positions, it is something terran does not need to do when they go MMM. the difference between MMM, that don't matter from where you attack and a standard protoss army that has front, middle and "rear", is huge, and have already caused the defeat of many professionals because they were caught by surprise. EDIT: On August 28 2011 09:43 Griffith` wrote: One of the things I fucking hate about the raven is the amount of research upgrades it needs to be viable:
Consider Auto-Turrets:
Durable Materials (Lasts Longer) Building Armor (+2 Building Armor) Hi-Sec Auto Tracking (+1 Range) Raven Energy
Consider HSM:
HSM Research Raven Energy
Consider PDD:
Hi-Sec Auto Tracking (+1 Range) Raven Energy Durable Materials (Lasts Longer) Building Armor (+2 Building Armor)
In other words, for a raven to fully utilize its potential, the terran player needs to spend
800 Minerals and 900 Gas
LOL lol, a zealot to utilize it full potential takes 200/200 charge 525/525 ground weapons +1 +2 +3 525/525 ground armor +1 +2 +3 900/900 plasma shields +1 +2 +3 2150/2150 OMFG!!! .... You're whining about the fact that you have to put zealots in front of stalkers? And colossus in the back?Are you freaking serious? Terran is forced to get perfect concaves vs toss, and you whine because you have to do a little unit positioning? And please, stop crying about utilizing full zealot potential. That applies for every damn unit in the game, and while Zerg and Terran have 2 upgrade paths for ground units, you only have one. You deserve it: http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y73/MuzTx1/IDFP.jpg?t=1268104835 Hes being sarcastic about utilising zealots. On another Note. The P colossus ball obv requires less micro than bio and are fairly A-move, noone is saying it otherwise. HT on the other hand are where P micro comes in.
If you think that he's sarcastic then you are a fool. Even if he wants it to seem that way, that's 100% what he actually believes, and it's pretty obvious, considering how much he whines about Protoss in the previous paragraph.
|
On August 29 2011 05:28 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 11:29 Squigly wrote:On August 28 2011 11:17 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:On August 28 2011 10:38 rpgalon wrote:chargelot is A-move, but you have to always put then on front of the stalkers/sentries, colossus need to always be behind the army, every move command you do, you have to put then in their correct positions, it is something terran does not need to do when they go MMM. the difference between MMM, that don't matter from where you attack and a standard protoss army that has front, middle and "rear", is huge, and have already caused the defeat of many professionals because they were caught by surprise. EDIT: On August 28 2011 09:43 Griffith` wrote: One of the things I fucking hate about the raven is the amount of research upgrades it needs to be viable:
Consider Auto-Turrets:
Durable Materials (Lasts Longer) Building Armor (+2 Building Armor) Hi-Sec Auto Tracking (+1 Range) Raven Energy
Consider HSM:
HSM Research Raven Energy
Consider PDD:
Hi-Sec Auto Tracking (+1 Range) Raven Energy Durable Materials (Lasts Longer) Building Armor (+2 Building Armor)
In other words, for a raven to fully utilize its potential, the terran player needs to spend
800 Minerals and 900 Gas
LOL lol, a zealot to utilize it full potential takes 200/200 charge 525/525 ground weapons +1 +2 +3 525/525 ground armor +1 +2 +3 900/900 plasma shields +1 +2 +3 2150/2150 OMFG!!! .... You're whining about the fact that you have to put zealots in front of stalkers? And colossus in the back?Are you freaking serious? Terran is forced to get perfect concaves vs toss, and you whine because you have to do a little unit positioning? And please, stop crying about utilizing full zealot potential. That applies for every damn unit in the game, and while Zerg and Terran have 2 upgrade paths for ground units, you only have one. You deserve it: http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y73/MuzTx1/IDFP.jpg?t=1268104835 Hes being sarcastic about utilising zealots. On another Note. The P colossus ball obv requires less micro than bio and are fairly A-move, noone is saying it otherwise. HT on the other hand are where P micro comes in. If you think that he's sarcastic then you are a fool. Even if he wants it to seem that way, that's 100% what he actually believes, and it's pretty obvious, considering how much he whines about Protoss in the previous paragraph.
Troll much?
|
As a protoss player I like the changes more or less (infestor maybe not nerfed enough?). But my general observation (not just this patch) is that it is mostly boring protoss units that get buffed (archon, immortal) and the more interesting, fun, micro-oriented units (void ray, high templar, stalker, mothership) get nerfed. Warp prism is the only exception.
I also feel like the new patch only reinforces the dominance of the robo tech tree over stargate and TC openings.
|
On August 30 2011 00:28 eugalp wrote: As a protoss player I like the changes more or less (infestor maybe not nerfed enough?). Damage decreased by 16%. It will deal roughly a third of what storm deals over the same duration. Is it all about the root?
But my general observation (not just this patch) is that it is mostly boring protoss units that get buffed (archon, immortal) and the more interesting, fun, micro-oriented units (void ray, high templar, stalker, mothership) get nerfed. Warp prism is the only exception. Mostly opinion. You say archon and immortal are "boring", while void ray is "fun" (all 3 are a-move units). Higher Templar and Archon are for the most part the same unit (you can always turn B into A). Mothership was actually buffed, oddly enough.
I also feel like the new patch only reinforces the dominance of the robo tech tree over stargate and TC openings. Blizz wants to strongly suggest the robo in PvP (instead of twilight or just no tech) to make the matchup less retarded. Observers make it less coinflippy, and immortals return defender's advantage to the equation. Something may need to be done about colossi however...
Against Z and T, Stargate Robo and TC are all viable tech paths so I don't know what you're talking about.
|
On August 30 2011 00:58 Morphling_ wrote: Damage decreased by 16%. It will deal roughly a third of what storm deals over the same duration. Is it all about the root? FG is only one ability out of 3, each of which is very powerful IMO. Infestor is an incredibly versatile spellcaster which pretty much allows zerg to mass it. You don't see protoss players walking around with 12+ HTs.
Mostly opinion. You say archon and immortal are "boring", while void ray is "fun" (all 3 are a-move units). Higher Templar and Archon are for the most part the same unit (you can always turn B into A). Mothership was actually buffed, oddly enough. VR is not at "a-move" unit since you have to keep them alive. If you can a-move with VRs, you probably already won (or are in silver league). The fact that many protoss players don't even bother with storm anymore and morph templars into archons immediately is bad IMO. Acceleration buff for MS is very marginal compared to the previous nerf (and the overall expense of the unit itself).
On August 30 2011 00:58 Morphling_ wrote:Blizz wants to strongly suggest the robo in PvP (instead of twilight or just no tech) to make the matchup less retarded. Observers make it less coinflippy, and immortals return defender's advantage to the equation. Something may need to be done about colossi however...
Against Z and T, Stargate Robo and TC are all viable tech paths so I don't know what you're talking about. Stargate tech can be used to exploit zerg's weak anti-air and force spores but not much more than that. Look at Tyler's game vs Haypro at MLG. Carriers are almost never seen.
|
On August 29 2011 03:47 darklight54321 wrote: He was kinda being an idiot in his thing about unnofical stats relating to the very highest level of play.
It's admitted that balance is different between levels of play. Imba in pro levels is related to actual abilities and dps of units, while imba in pre diamond is closely related to the "Less micro more imba". The magic area of diamond to med masters is the area where these two concepts collide, hence why you hear much more "this is imba" from that range and intelligent arguments presented to support their arguments, cause honestly, some things are imba in that range when taken on a case by case basis.
If you can't balance everyone, balance to the highest point. Balancing to the highest point makes small differences in the overall scheme of things. Balancing to the lowest or the medium can cause a huge issue in the other skill levels. This is so good post, untill the last section where conclusion is pretty amazingly false.
At no point this game should have gone to point, where balance is compensated by players need to be better. This is the worst thing that has happend and is affecting this game. At highest level of play being able to multitask, micro and macro same time is so far ahead of normal level of play, that those players are compensating the lack of balance by being faster and better, as such making races looks like balanced. Every time we see for example huge blink micro, we should ask is that something that normal player can do, if not is the game balanced without such skill. Or we see guy doing 3 drops simultaneously, or making almost perfect injections while fighting with main army and rebuilding, the question should be the same.
This raises the question, is it truly so that game should be balanced by top pros, or should game actually be balanced by something in between. Where the lack of skills compensation wouldnt be such huge deciding factor. After that balance would be achieved, all the skills taht players would be able to gather, would be their weapons to be better than their competitors. Instead of normal playing being huge amount of balance compensation and trying to get upper hand, by puttin enemy to situation where balance lacks for that race and theirs is more powerful.
By this I dont mean race v same race matches, cause there balance is always neglecting each others and even players need to overcome race weaknesses and real race problems, both are at even ground. I talk about stuff that makes playing certain race without huge expertiese, micro and macro, at level where no matter what race is played those would be "same" (not same same, but hope you get the point). If player can at top of that play superb micro or do insane 3 drops at time, then they should and must be better than their enemies, currently it just isnt so and guys who play worse are able to win at situations, where they should not, at least as long as we base discussion to races and not players skill.
|
I think that the combination of the nerf of the blink research , the up of the immortal and the change of the view will make blink play less popular in PvP , so everyone's going to play robo . But it'll make the stargate opener better because there won't be anymore blink play .
|
On August 30 2011 00:58 Morphling_ wrote: You say archon and immortal are "boring", while void ray is "fun" (all 3 are a-move units).
Neither the void ray nor the immortal is an effective "a-move" unit (whatever that is supposed to be)...
|
On August 30 2011 03:08 eugalp wrote: FG is only one ability out of 3, each of which is very powerful IMO. Infestor is an incredibly versatile spellcaster which pretty much allows zerg to mass it. You don't see protoss players walking around with 12+ HTs. You are acting like High templar don't have other amazing abilities, a move that decimates casters (including the big bad infestor), as well as the ability to turn into an attacking unit (Infestor is the only unit in the game that requires energy to have an impact on a battle).
As for walking around with 12+ HTs, maybe they should? The obvious drawback of the HT which is not present in the Infestor is the movespeed issue, but you can always shuttle them around in a Warp Prism (I have seen HuK and others do it, and its only going to get better after the patch).
VR is not at "a-move" unit since you have to keep them alive. If you can a-move with VRs, you probably already won (or are in silver league). The fact that many protoss players don't even bother with storm anymore and morph templars into archons immediately is bad IMO. Acceleration buff for MS is very marginal compared to the previous nerf (and the overall expense of the unit itself).
Is there a reason why it's important to keep VRs alive but not important to keep archons and immortals alive? They are all roughly the same cost. Pulling back a low shield archon will give you essentially an entirely fresh one after shields recharge, and likewise the Immortal will regain powerful tanking ability due to the passive. To play devil's advocate for a moment, you could argue that it is more important to keep those 2 alive than it is a void ray.
They morph archons because archons are good. Some players won't research storm, because against some army types you don't want it. Generally though, if you are facing bio or heavy ling play then I feel it would be a mistake not to get storm. Implying that storm is a weak ability seems very silly to me.
Acceleration buff is pretty critical given that a primary complaint of how the mothership operates is that it is incredibly lacking in mobility. A mothership is still an extremely powerful and versatile unit.
Stargate tech can be used to exploit zerg's weak anti-air and force spores but not much more than that. Look at Tyler's game vs Haypro at MLG. Carriers are almost never seen.
If Stargate is a relatively weak strategy, then instead of pointing to 2 low level pros playing a non-serious game (tyler wanted to let haypro win to keep his seed), could you address why the player who is widely considered the best protoss in the world has been opening stargate against zerg nearly every game for months?
|
You can't pull back units affected by concussive shells or fungal growth. Generally any short-range units that you put into a fight as protoss are committed to the death.
Storm is situationally good. Because it does not stack with itself, it's pretty useless against high HP units such as roaches, thors, and ultras. Even marauders with sufficient medivac healing can laugh it off unless you have colossus in the battle as well (especially because with stim it's easy to run out from under storm, usually kiting backwards so the zealots eat more storm damage than the marauders).
Colossus are generally better than templar for AOE damage for several reasons. First, colossus damage stacks. With ~5 colossus, every attack melts a row of marauders -- no medivac can heal fast enough to mitigate the damage. There is no way to achieve that effect with storm, regardless of the number of templar. Second, colossus AOE does not damage friendly units. Third, colosus can walk on top of your army; unlike templar you will never end up with a colossus unable to attack because it's trapped behind your other forces. Fourth, colossus AOE is direct damage, not a damage-over-time spell where the damage done depends on how long the enemy units stupidly stand still beneath it.
Colossus are the superior protoss AOE, probably the best AOE in the game.
What about other races' AOE units? Tank damage stacks and is direct damage. Fungal growth does not damage friendly units and opponents cannot run away from it. EMP stacks, is direct damage, and does not damage friendly units -- hp-wise, anyway. It also decloaks enemy units. HSM is direct damage that most units cannot escape; it stacks and the raven will never be trapped behind your army.
Storm is good because it's an AOE ability and AOE is good. But Storm is probably the worst AOE ability in the game. So protoss get the best and the worst. This is why protoss strategy considers the templar to be a transition or back-up unit: If you start gateway heavy, you use templar as a stop-gap caster to bridge your way to colossus. If you go robo-heavy from the start, templar are your fallback once too many vikings or corruptors get out...but ultimately you're just scraping by until you can manage to start building colossus again.
Stargate plays are only useful so long as you can leverage void rays and phoenix to keep the enemy's unit count low and thus avoid needing AOE. No successful protoss air strategy can allow the opponent to get a large ground or air army before transitioning into colossus. So stargate plays are either transitional or they're all-in; it's not a viable "end game goal" tech tree because it has no AOE.
Starcraft 2 is all about AOE damage.
|
On August 30 2011 07:13 galivet wrote: You can't pull back units affected by concussive shells or fungal growth. Generally any short-range units that you put into a fight as protoss are committed to the death.
Storm is situationally good. Because it does not stack with itself, it's pretty useless against high HP units such as roaches, thors, and ultras. Even marauders with sufficient medivac healing can laugh it off unless you have colossus in the battle as well (especially because with stim it's easy to run out from under storm, usually kiting backwards so the zealots eat more storm damage than the marauders).
Colossus are generally better than templar for AOE damage for several reasons. First, colossus damage stacks. With ~5 colossus, every attack melts a row of marauders -- no medivac can heal fast enough to mitigate the damage. There is no way to achieve that effect with storm, regardless of the number of templar. Second, colossus AOE does not damage friendly units. Third, colosus can walk on top of your army; unlike templar you will never end up with a colossus unable to attack because it's trapped behind your other forces. Fourth, colossus AOE is direct damage, not a damage-over-time spell where the damage done depends on how long the enemy units stupidly stand still beneath it.
Colossus are the superior protoss AOE, probably the best AOE in the game.
What about other races' AOE units? Tank damage stacks and is direct damage. Fungal growth does not damage friendly units and opponents cannot run away from it. EMP stacks, is direct damage, and does not damage friendly units -- hp-wise, anyway. It also decloaks enemy units. HSM is direct damage that most units cannot escape; it stacks and the raven will never be trapped behind your army.
Storm is good because it's an AOE ability and AOE is good. But Storm is probably the worst AOE ability in the game. So protoss get the best and the worst. This is why protoss strategy considers the templar to be a transition or back-up unit: If you start gateway heavy, you use templar as a stop-gap caster to bridge your way to colossus. If you go robo-heavy from the start, templar are your fallback once too many vikings or corruptors get out...but ultimately you're just scraping by until you can manage to start building colossus again.
Stargate plays are only useful so long as you can leverage void rays and phoenix to keep the enemy's unit count low and thus avoid needing AOE. No successful protoss air strategy can allow the opponent to get a large ground or air army before transitioning into colossus. So stargate plays are either transitional or they're all-in; it's not a viable "end game goal" tech tree because it has no AOE.
Starcraft 2 is all about AOE damage.
Awesome post. I wouldn't say that SC2 is all about AoE damage, but against some enemy compositions you need it to be cost effective, for example against Terran bio once medivacs are out, since Protoss can't win in a direct (big) engagement without AoE support, unless ridiculously ahead in upgrades or supply (or both).
|
On August 30 2011 05:22 Morphling_ wrote: (Infestor is the only unit in the game that requires energy to have an impact on a battle).
Ravens.
|
On August 30 2011 03:29 BlackW0lf wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2011 03:47 darklight54321 wrote: He was kinda being an idiot in his thing about unnofical stats relating to the very highest level of play.
It's admitted that balance is different between levels of play. Imba in pro levels is related to actual abilities and dps of units, while imba in pre diamond is closely related to the "Less micro more imba". The magic area of diamond to med masters is the area where these two concepts collide, hence why you hear much more "this is imba" from that range and intelligent arguments presented to support their arguments, cause honestly, some things are imba in that range when taken on a case by case basis.
If you can't balance everyone, balance to the highest point. Balancing to the highest point makes small differences in the overall scheme of things. Balancing to the lowest or the medium can cause a huge issue in the other skill levels. This is so good post, untill the last section where conclusion is pretty amazingly false. At no point this game should have gone to point, where balance is compensated by players need to be better. This is the worst thing that has happend and is affecting this game. At highest level of play being able to multitask, micro and macro same time is so far ahead of normal level of play, that those players are compensating the lack of balance by being faster and better, as such making races looks like balanced. Every time we see for example huge blink micro, we should ask is that something that normal player can do, if not is the game balanced without such skill. Or we see guy doing 3 drops simultaneously, or making almost perfect injections while fighting with main army and rebuilding, the question should be the same. This raises the question, is it truly so that game should be balanced by top pros, or should game actually be balanced by something in between. Where the lack of skills compensation wouldnt be such huge deciding factor. After that balance would be achieved, all the skills taht players would be able to gather, would be their weapons to be better than their competitors. Instead of normal playing being huge amount of balance compensation and trying to get upper hand, by puttin enemy to situation where balance lacks for that race and theirs is more powerful. By this I dont mean race v same race matches, cause there balance is always neglecting each others and even players need to overcome race weaknesses and real race problems, both are at even ground. I talk about stuff that makes playing certain race without huge expertiese, micro and macro, at level where no matter what race is played those would be "same" (not same same, but hope you get the point). If player can at top of that play superb micro or do insane 3 drops at time, then they should and must be better than their enemies, currently it just isnt so and guys who play worse are able to win at situations, where they should not, at least as long as we base discussion to races and not players skill.
I hesitate to quote such a large post that is mostly babble in the way it's presented, but I will.
Your argument is one i've heard before, The idea that having that high level of skill negates the imbalance of certain situations because they can do stuff that most people couldn't do. I feel like this has some merit, but not enough for the current balance issue to change. For two reasons.
Reason 1, The economical reason. By keeping the game balancing at the highest standard they keep the game competitive. Bigger competition means more viewers more people who get into the game and more people who will buy blizzard goods. If you took the Esports out of blizzard, blizzard would be a shell of a company. By not balancing to the Esports level, they would essentially ruin the competition part of the game.
Reason 2, the actual balance reason. The very same reason that you say allows for slight imbalances in pro games is your own argument. If professional are evenly matched even with those minor balance issues (as i'll address those things that are not obvious like BFH or Infestors or KA HT when combined with warp mechanic) Then what would it be if those minor balance issues were "fixed". The old Collosi Deathball A move problem. If they had nerfed the deathball when zerg could counter it (as they have learned how to now) then it would have reverberated into the pro level. Any minor nerf could potentially make a core unit in the toss army useless, making what is right now the weakest race on the pro scene even weaker. This whole idea is the basis for my original conclusion. When you balance to the highest level, the minor balance issues are just that, minor. While they may be a bit imba in some situations in some matchups at certain skill levels, it does not make a huge difference in the overall scheme of the game. Something that's imba in diamond/masters may not be imba in the other leagues. Something that's imba in bronze/gold may not be imba in other leagues. But for the most part, things that are imba in the proffessional scene are generally imba in the majority of leagues. BFH is one example. Even the worst terran can make use of BFHs simply because of the cost to defend it through teching or spines or suicidal lings.
When you make the argument of the professional having the ability to handle slightly op mechanics, you also need to remember that the one whose doing the slightly op mechanic is also professional, and that same bonus to defend goes to offense.
|
On August 30 2011 00:58 Morphling_ wrote: Damage decreased by 16%. It will deal roughly a third of what storm deals over the same duration. Is it all about the root?
Pretty much. Remember that fungal and feedback have the same range, meaning infestors do not have a real counter. If you keep templar in the back of your army, infestors can just fungal the front and run back, if you move templar to the front they get sniped in seconds. Also you can't use templar to prevent mass parasite because its cast before you can feedback.
|
On August 30 2011 07:13 galivet wrote: You can't pull back units affected by concussive shells or fungal growth. Generally any short-range units that you put into a fight as protoss are committed to the death. Conveniently forgetting about forcefield. Your statement now becomes: Any short range ground unit in the game is always commited to death when it fights. Do you really think that is true?
Storm is situationally good. Because it does not stack with itself, it's pretty useless against high HP units such as roaches, thors, and ultras. Even marauders with sufficient medivac healing can laugh it off unless you have colossus in the battle as well (especially because with stim it's easy to run out from under storm, usually kiting backwards so the zealots eat more storm damage than the marauders). Whoa this is ridiculous. You claim that Storm, which does more than twice as much as fungal, can be "laughed off". Its "useless" against high hp units. So fungal is even more useless against them right? Then the second part of the statement is contradictory. First you imply its easy to laugh off the damage, then comment on how its easy to get out of the damage. Which one is it?
If you tank the storm, you are taking massive damage. If you move out of the storm, you are not attacking while you are moving, and Toss is free to restorm the new spot.
Colossus are generally better than templar for AOE damage for several reasons. First, colossus damage stacks. With ~5 colossus, every attack melts a row of marauders -- no medivac can heal fast enough to mitigate the damage. There is no way to achieve that effect with storm, regardless of the number of templar. Second, colossus AOE does not damage friendly units. Third, colosus can walk on top of your army; unlike templar you will never end up with a colossus unable to attack because it's trapped behind your other forces. Fourth, colossus AOE is direct damage, not a damage-over-time spell where the damage done depends on how long the enemy units stupidly stand still beneath it.
Colossus are the superior protoss AOE, probably the best AOE in the game. When i started responding I thought you were the same guy I had been talking with before but I see that you are not. So I don't know about your stance on fungal, but every problem you have with HT can be directly applied to Infestors. Medivacs will be able to heal fungal fast enough, way faster than they can heal storm. Infestors can also be stuck behind the army and not be able to cast.
Also again the ignorance about "they can just run out". By the time any unit besides stimmed bio can actually make it out of the storm, assuming fighter pilot reflexes, it will tick for at least 2 seconds, which is 40 damage (fungal level damage). During that time, the unit could not attack, and can be immediately stormed again.
Your thoughts on Colossi are pretty accurate, but constantly forgetting that they are way more expensive than templar are, and expecting them to be equal units. Lots and lots and lots of pros favor templar over colossi these days, which sort of goes against your thoughts.
Storm is good because it's an AOE ability and AOE is good. But Storm is probably the worst AOE ability in the game. So protoss get the best and the worst. This is why protoss strategy considers the templar to be a transition or back-up unit: If you start gateway heavy, you use templar as a stop-gap caster to bridge your way to colossus. If you go robo-heavy from the start, templar are your fallback once too many vikings or corruptors get out...but ultimately you're just scraping by until you can manage to start building colossus again. I strongly disagree that Storm is the worst, especially in a world with hunter seeker missle.
Stargate plays are only useful so long as you can leverage void rays and phoenix to keep the enemy's unit count low and thus avoid needing AOE. No successful protoss air strategy can allow the opponent to get a large ground or air army before transitioning into colossus. So stargate plays are either transitional or they're all-in; it's not a viable "end game goal" tech tree because it has no AOE. Sort of like... Hellions. Or Roaches. Or Mutalisks. Or Banshees.
Nobody uses those right?
(again assuming you are talking that stargate isn't viable, im not sure what your thoughts are on that though)
Starcraft 2 is all about AOE damage. If that is true, why do many protoss think that the race that only has a single aoe ability, with the lowest damage of any aoe in the game, is generally beating "the aoe race"?
|
Personally, I don't think snipe is that great against Ultralisks at all. It takes 10+ snipes or something ridiculous like that. And during that time, you can't micro anything else.
|
|
|
|