EPTIf you ever played against a turtleing opponent you will know what iam talking about - there is a point at which you cannot win the game anymore even if you have like 2 base more and mined 20k more ressources.
IMBALANCED! - Introduction - Page 34
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
If you have criticism, you need to address the content, not the hosts. Idra and Artosis are 2 (1.5) Zerg players, but you can't point that out and then blanket them as biased. Respond to the content. You can't tell them to "get 2 Terran and Protoss players". That's fucking obtuse advice. "Yo just get 4 more high level players to record with you." Yes, I think everyone sees the value in getting it, but it's not practical. Respond to the content and use evidence / logic to back up your claims. | ||
|
idonthinksobro
3138 Posts
If you ever played against a turtleing opponent you will know what iam talking about - there is a point at which you cannot win the game anymore even if you have like 2 base more and mined 20k more ressources. | ||
|
rS.Sinatra
Canada785 Posts
On February 04 2011 09:06 SoLaR[i.C] wrote: Thank you for this post, it's exceptional. 100% agree with this. Collosus was already slightly nerfed (they brought the damage down but increased firing rate, this is an indirect nerf since all units have armour) for the reasons they brought out. Further nerfing it would just make it an ineffective counter to something that otherwise has no counter (hydra/roach). It's simply too expensive to spam immortal-templar (immortal vs roach templar vs hydra). | ||
|
SpoR
United States1542 Posts
Costs, build time, hp, shields, damage ? So instead of 300/200 6 psi for a 200/150 life, 15x2 attack at 6 range maybe something like 200/150 5 psi for a 150/100 12x2 at 5 range? and then just keep the range upgrade at 200/200 and adding +3 range. Alternatively, what about a direct nerf just to the collosus range itself and not alter anything else so +2 instead of +3 ? How about an upgrade that allows it to cliff/unit walk? This will reduce the collosus count by at least 1 | ||
|
Treemonkeys
United States2082 Posts
On February 04 2011 08:54 maahes wrote: Hello, Teamliquid - I am a long-time lurker, first time poster, and I wanted to address a post in the first few pages of this thread that was definitely a gem floating in an ocean of shit that many people seem to have quoted and pledged agreement with. Saechiis's post, which should be applauded for its calm, level-headed tone, violates many rules of debate and offers little in the way of legitimate criticism. While my response is as lengthy as the original, I think I offer a lot in the way of proper thinking about these kinds of discussions, so please take the time to read it. This is a mixture of ad-hominem and questioning credentials, neither of which pertain to the arguments presented by Idra and Artosis. If one were to read this paragraph without the context of having seen the episode, one might presume that the hosts are parading as game designers deciding upon what should or should not be changed in Starcraft 2. Neither of them claims that they are judges of balance - instead, the show's premise is based around the discussion of current strong trends in professional level Starcraft. In fact, they open the Colossus discussion with "talking about something that may or may not be imbalanced." This is not, in fact, a coy opening - Idra's stated conclusion is that a more diverse map pool will lead to an answer, and Artosis explicitly states he's not sold on the idea as-is. The entire twenty minutes between the opening and conclusion are spent discussing, not passing judgment. More ad-hominem, and more questioning credentials... There is no good criticism here. Additionally, the race preference of the hosts and any future guests is completely irrelevant to the truth of their argument(s). If what they say is valid, then that's what you have to call into question, not their background. The other side of the story is that the Protoss tech to Colossi. This is an example of arguing in reverse - the point that Saechiis claims Idra and Artosis ignored was actually already assumed. It was also explicitly stated that the Colossus was not fundamentally broken - neither of these guys is suggesting that it should be removed, or that Protoss doesn't need the damage it provides. Idra's conclusion is that the Zerg now has no direct response, unlike the Protoss's situation, where their next move against a roach/hydra army is to build colossi, and that the current map pool lacks both the resources and space to out-macro, outmaneuver or overwhelm a Colossus fueled army. He mentioned a possible alternative being proactive, using heavy Muta pressure and forcing a Protoss 2-base all-in instead of providing a direct response to Colossi. I don't know if he's right, but that's the point that you should be attacking. These two quotes represent the real 'meat' of the post in question, I think - a truly valid opinion with some muscle behind it, and after lurking around Teamliquid, I can really empathize with Saechiis here. Regardless, it's not the job of any community's figureheads to pander to or consider the lowest common denominator of its membership. There are tons of intelligent people that are going to tune in, submit questions/have their questions answered, and influence discussion between their peers using the basis that Idra and Artosis have provided and it will be totally sweet - the amount of increased whining is unquantifiable, and an increased output of tripe that should already be ignored doesn't really matter... Zero times five equals zero, y'know? Something unique to the SC2 community is its transparency - the people that are virtually celebrities not only produce content and stream games and give interviews are so very close to us that they interact with us directly on this board. No amount of baddie whining should detract from anyone's efforts to keep us close to the progamers that live at the bleeding edge of Starcraft 2's metagame and trends. P.S. While writing this post and searching through the thread to see if anyone else had offered similar corrections, I stumbled upon Saechiis's post in response to Beetlelisk, where he simply launches another attack on character while either ignoring their arguments or twisting them into angles to attack their character. Notably, he never responded to any criticism of his initial post. I won't address the second post directly, but it is worth looking at to see how someone apparently level-headed can be completely abrasive and their words empty, which is why in these kinds of discussions, it's important to attack arguments, not people. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=7813653 Fantastic points, it is unfortunate to see saechiis's post gaining so much praise, when it offers nearly zero comments in direct relation to the video. It is full of "obvious" assumptions, that are never explained, ad hominems, and attacks towards the intellegence and skill level of people who might agree with the video, when the video itself is actually a direct opposite of a oversimplification and overuse of the word "imbalance". If "brainless bronze zergs" actually took a note from what is discussed in the video and how it is discussed, it would only have a positive effect on balance discussions as a whole. Why? Because of some points that were clearly stressed in the video: 1. Artosis and Idra are not 100% sure there is imbalance 2. A shift in meta game or a change of maps could change everything 3. There are different levels of imbalance and IF the colossus is imbalanced, it is not a severe imbalance in the sense of a broken or unfair matchup | ||
|
aquanda
United States477 Posts
| ||
|
maahes`ra
United States255 Posts
On February 04 2011 09:32 SpoR wrote: Would it be reasonable to lower everything on the collosus? Costs, build time, hp, shields, damage ? So instead of 300/200 for a 200/150 life, 15x2 attack at 6 range maybe something like 200/150 for a 150/100 12x2 at 5 range? and then just keep the range upgrade at 200/200 and adding +3 range. Alternatively, what about a direct nerf just to the collosus range itself and not alter anything else so +2 instead of +3 ? How about an upgrade that allows it to cliff/unit walk? This will reduce the collosus count by at least 1 I think the answer to this, and many other issues in the current metagame, is a more robust pool of maps. | ||
|
SpoR
United States1542 Posts
On February 04 2011 09:35 maahes wrote: I think the answer to this, and many other issues in the current metagame, is a more robust pool of maps. map balance isn't as simple as it was in BW though because we have units that ignore and modify terrain in this game. Forcefields, cliff walkers, teleporters, warp ins etc. In theory a player just needs an ultra to stop forcefields, but in practice that unit is so big and clumbsy that when mixed with your hydra roach army it's not going to clear any paths at all, the opponent will just forcefield where your ultra can't get to and focus fire him down. Ultras in pvp are not really the best choice of tech either. | ||
|
nikj
Canada669 Posts
On February 04 2011 08:59 MindRush wrote: was just stating the obvious TLO is sooooooooooooo good he is overpowered If you can't respect my opinion and warn me about it, then I remember something from way back where my country was under comunism I don't see what that has to do with this thread... I really enjoyed the show and was dismayed to see the thread closed. Happy to see it back up, looking forward to future episodes. | ||
|
IPA
United States3206 Posts
If the word "imbalanced" does not sit well with you, we can use some other phrases: "less fleshed-out" and "one-dimensional" spring to mind. There are fewer viable openings; that is painful. There comes a time when you have to respect the opinions of superior players (especially when in virtually every balance context we hear on streams, casts, etc, Z is almost unanimously seen as the weakest race). Note, this doesn't make it an unwinnable battle -- far from it. It just means Zerg has to work harder to handle the (relatively) simple, powerful, and varied builds from T and P. But wait, 2500 Master players think the game is balanced so we should just quit whining and learn to play, I know, I know. Cool show! Provocative. | ||
|
maahes`ra
United States255 Posts
On February 04 2011 09:37 SpoR wrote: map balance isn't as simple as it was in BW though because we have units that ignore and modify terrain in this game. Forcefields, cliff walkers, teleporters, warp ins etc. In theory a player just needs an ultra to stop forcefields, but in practice that unit is so big and clumbsy that when mixed with your hydra roach army it's not going to clear any paths at all, the opponent will just forcefield where your ultra can't get to and focus fire him down. Ultras in pvp are not really the best choice of tech either. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply it was, and you're totally right. I'm not suggesting that maps should/should have magically appeared out of nowhere - just that an influx of non-Blizzard maps will inspire metagame shifts and that any further balance patches should wait until that point or beyond to modify any of SC2's current fundamentals. | ||
|
dkim
United States255 Posts
in phoenix strat you force hydras and go collosi because your air is countered therefore you switch route to land units. and is it so surprising that you'd go for the strongest land unit in meta/late game? also, its like any other end tier units. if you let him mass too many of those then it will roll you. 6 collosi is just as scary as 6 battle cruisers, 6 brood lords/ultralisks. the idea is you don't let them mass that many. I love the idea of the show, but really, you need to consider pov from other races besides zerg. edit: that is probably until you visit terran units. then i'll probably cheer you on from sidelines  | ||
|
SwizzY
United States1549 Posts
I would really like the topic of marauders with stim, HT with amulet, TvZ bunker/tank slow pushes, and the whole rock,paper, scissors de-evolution of tactical strategy to be touched upon as well. | ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
"Why do they ignore tvp/tvz balance? All about Zerg...seems like an ok idea...but it's all about Zerg..." Let me elaborate in a constructive manner so that people don't just look at my concise post and assume i'm posting because of some sort of Terran bias. The show is a great idea, I watched the entire thing yesterday and thought they gave good insight into why the collosus is so strong in PvP, and especially PvZ/ZvP. My critique of the show, and where many others were criticizing that it may be too Zerg focused, meaning coming from a "zerg is up" perspective. And while they discussed the collosus, a protoss unit, for the majority of the episode, it was all concerning Zerg's problems against it, with a sprinkling of the PvP issues of it. I would have, as many other viewers, appreciated it if they had also looked at it from a Terran perspective in Terran vs Protoss, as the collosus also does give many problems to Terran users in that match-up. They just seemed so magnetized to go from the Zerg point of view, which is understandable. Or maybe it is legitimately because they of course have not played that much TvP that they did not discuss it, but you can see how that would make their show appear to not be objective. I would also hope that in future episodes they discuss balance issues from a Terran/Protoss perspective, as not everyone on earth believes that Zerg is as underpowered as these two are presenting it to be as a fact...it's their opinion. Perhaps they should bring in a Terran guest for a Terran perspective too? Maybe jinro? Huk for prtooss? Overall, I liked the show though, hope they do more. | ||
|
Hdizz
Canada93 Posts
| ||
|
Assymptotic
United States552 Posts
Yes we have high templar, but they are a riskier investment than Colossus for less return. They require good storm placement (which can still be dodged) and feedback micro, they are difficult to protect due to their low movement speed and lack of attack, and you need to remember to merge them into an Archon when they're out of mana. To top it off, the Archon isn't as strong as it used to be. To add even FURTHER injury, vespene geysers no longer have infinite gas like in Starcraft 1; thus, our ability to keep producing templar wears out as a game drags on. This is not to say I think HT should be buffed. IMO, they are well balanced, probably the most balanced of the tier 3 Protoss units. The only other late game tech options are Carriers and Motherships. Thus, if you want to nerf Colossi, to compensate, the Protoss will need stronger capitol ships to handle the macro power of a Zerg ground army (as they should have, considering these ships are supposed to be the strongest things in the Protoss arsenal from a lore standpoint). I don't think this is an unreasonable request; as of now, these units are a total joke and could stand a huge buff. | ||
|
DooMDash
United States1015 Posts
| ||
|
terranghost
United States980 Posts
The overall content of the show is pretty good and idra it does seem is trying to remain as unbaised as possible. | ||
|
Yurie
11631 Posts
On February 04 2011 09:53 avilo wrote: I would have, as many other viewers, appreciated it if they had also looked at it from a Terran perspective in Terran vs Protoss, as the collosus also does give many problems to Terran users in that match-up. They had the opinion that it was mostly balanced in TvP. Thus didn't need much time. How is that strange? When they discuss vikings being imbalanced in TvP they will probably not think it is as imbalanced in TvZ and spend less time there. | ||
|
Amanitar
Netherlands26 Posts
Just because Idra is usually a ragenerd, does not take away that in this show he clearly showed he really does know alot about all the relations of strong/weak points in matchups. Kinda hating that people still bring up the GSL as balancing point for Sc2, it's just not right, AT ALL. Thanks Artosis for putting up this show, looking forward to more of the new insights you guys bring into the game! | ||
|
Amanitar
Netherlands26 Posts
On February 04 2011 10:02 terranghost wrote: I don't have alot of respect for Idra because he tends to rage as much as he does but that is not going stop me from watching this show no matter how biased Idra is he is with Artosis who does alot of prolevel casting with tasteless. So if you think one of the hosts are biased don't watch or take it with a grain of salt. The overall content of the show is pretty good and idra it does seem is trying to remain as unbaised as possible. Seriously, what does idra's in-game rage have to do with his exceptional ability to analyse a unit/matchup? | ||
| ||
