StarCraft 2

[gummybear]

Originally Posted by Kafriel

and if they didn't cost as much, the toss would have too much of an advantage, no?

MM ball said hi to you with StimPack.

they should just give zerg a big buff and leave the toss alone.

[Kafriel]

MM ball said hi to you with StimPack.

I believe a few zealots with charge will take out quite a few of those...if you want to get creative, five sentries in a flower pattern to ensure no escape before the storm, and if storm's too pricey or high-tier, void rays are also an option to add in the zealot squad. Every strategy has a proper counter in all races, how much they cost and how soon you can get to them is the product of your macro skills against your opponent's.

[Deathkillz]

Originally Posted by Kafriel

I believe a few zealots with charge will take out quite a few of those...if you want to get creative, five sentries in a flower pattern to ensure no escape before the storm, and if storm's too pricey or high-tier, void rays are also an option to add in the zealot squad. Every strategy has a proper counter in all races, how much they cost and how soon you can get to them is the product of your macro skills against your opponent's.

It seems more like micro skills to me

And it almost sounds like you are trying to say that toss are easier to use than the other races...

I still don't get why zealots have their production time increased. Oh boy I'm going to have more fun being 6 pooled now

[Kafriel]

^ Zealot time's up as an anti-proxy measure, I think it was a good idea...

And it almost sounds like you are trying to say that toss are easier to use than the other races...

I am specifically saying that they are easier to use than Zerg . Terrans are even more user-friendly than toss...

It seems more like micro skills to me

Expanding and securing resources (which is where the protoss can be struck hard) has to do with scouting and proper economy management, which are macro skills.

Oh boy I'm going to have more fun being 6 pooled now

I have nothing to add but lol xD maybe they'll increase zling time too in the next patch

[Shane Schwarzman]

How well did Blizzard make SC2? Does it play anthing like the first?

[brocko]

SC2 is great. Still the same style of RTS as the first with lots of very distinct features that sets it apart from the orginal. If you're expecting exactly the same game. Don't. It's similar in play but that's around it.

Battlenet 2.0 on the otherhand unfortunately takes one step forward and two steps backwards. I despise it so much. (Warning, battlenet 2.0 rant incoming.) Just moments earlier, i joined a custom map game. Game has half full and it didn't take long to fill up and get a full house. Great i thought to myself, "lets play!". The host was afk. What does that mean you ask? It pretty much means you don't get to play that map because Bnet 0.2 automatically shoves you into a game which it thinks is best for you. In this case it kept shoving me into the same stupid game with that afk host who won't press start. You can't kick him, you can't vote for a new host, you can't even organise another game with the other people stuck in the same boat because you can't choose which game to join in the first place, you can't do jack squat. Bnet 0.2; fuck you! Eventually i did get to play the map by hosting it myself, needless to say there's a reason why i wanted to join a game and not host it myself, my connectoin can't host for peanuts. I tried dumping the hosting privileges onto someone else, but they just kept passing the buck till it went full circle back to me again. Wasn't a very enjoyable experience as you may've imagined. I fucking love Bnet 2.0

Imo Protoss are the hardest micro race

Halfway writing up a reply to this, i realised i misread micro for macro instead lol
Since i was already half-way through i figured i'd go ahead and post it anyway, talk about being blinded by rage lol .

I think Toss is actually the most forgiving race to marco, epecially considering warp gates and chrono boost. Warp gates practically give you instant units. Forgot to macro your buildings while you were day-dreaming about? That's cool your units pop out instantly anyway Do that with any other race and you're stuck waiting an extra half a minute or however long on top of that time you wasted not macroing up

[-Sho-]

Well for me .

Easiest to hardest :

- Terran : Easy easy easy , Hit&Run Powaaa !!!

- Zerg : Mass units , Speed "Glings glings" ! Burrow/xplode/harass muta/nydus/infestor...

- Protoss : Expensive cost for strong units , shield regen , unit's position is very important (ex : Zealot on the front , Stalker behind , Immortal above them , Sentry between them using Shield and prepare to force field) , mistake = "increase lose rate" , I still think that Micro Protoss is the hardest . En Taro Tassadar !!

[RisArk]

Protoss is easier than Zerg, due to Queen management and the Larvae system. Most of your units are useless in the long run if you don't spread creep, while you also have to manage your larvaes limited to how many hatcheries+queens you have.

You also can't spontaneously make units like the Barrack/Warp Gate system, unless they scouted really well (And that usually requires sacrificing an Overload later in the game.)

It also doesn't help that the Marines and Stalkers are better utility units than the Hyrdralisks because they're either way cheaper tech units, or have better abilities (Blink.)

[Klashikari]

Originally Posted by Kafriel

I labeled them cheap shots because they really don't require much strategy or thinking to pull off.

...and I see no relevancy whatsoever. You really don't need any strategy for mass MM ball or mass roach hydra, do you?
And I think you are mistaking the definition of strategy anyway. Units are part of a strategy, regardless how they contribute. Even cheese "is" a strategy. Now calling one type of units "cheap shot" is rather ludicrous since it depends how the player is using them.

As for toss tech, yes shields are expensive but apply to all units, buildings included, and shields regen, giving you an essential auto-repair as long as they don't take too much damage.

EMP would like to have a word with you. It seems shield is really overrated, and even against zerg, it doesn't exactly grant that much whereas Protoss units aren't exactly resilient and the fact the shield takes the same extra damage due to the armor type.

Not true theorycraft, if anyone sees a flaw in that train of thought, please correct me:
In theory, it is rather better for protoss to actually upgrade armor first. Because Shield does regenerate, but HP do not. Due to this obvious point, you would rather try to lessen damage dealt on protoss HP than its shield. Especially that it is arguably better to have a better defensive stats than having 2 mediocre defense stats, due the way how damage are dealt in SCII (you rather want +1 armor for zealots so they have +2 armor, instead of having +1 shield and natural 1 armor).
And armor is much better because in a prolonged fight, you rarely have the time to actually withdraw, regenerate shield and go back to the fray.

Finally, a vast majority of protoss units have more HP than shields, thus, you would benefit armor more than shields on the long run (I'm not saying that shield is useless, since it is part of a protoss unit "HP" anyway). In fact, mathematically, armor would by far top over the benefit of shield. Shield is expensive just because it affect all protoss units. Because of these 2 major points, it is no wonder that you rarely see any early protoss shield upgrade, whereas weapon or armor are much more favored.

So, for what they DO, what they cost is not so insane.

Compared to the benefits of any other protoss ugrade, it is.

Also, ground weapons/armour goes for both melee and ranged, while the zerg have to particularly research each department on its own, making it a lot more costly in both time and resources, eventually.

That goes the same for Terran in a way. The explanation is a bit obvious though: the general cost of a protoss army is extremely steep. If the upgrade was the same than Terran and Zerg, it would simply be ridiculous to no end.

The separate unit skills are indeed expensive if someone chooses to use them all, but I doubt people research every single skill, and if they didn't cost as much, the toss would have too much of an advantage, no?

I did not imply they should have research as granted, in fact the researches of all races are balanced (except perhaps some things with Zerg. Hydra are still iffy slow with their upgrade).
You implied how well it can fare with the various units, but suddenly, you "just don't need every research". Yet, you are complaining of... "cheap shot" strategies, while these units need investment? I mean, yeah investing in HT, but if you don't invest with the amulet and psi storm, it is rather moot. I see little relevancy to your very first comment after all of this, since you were basically implying that protoss had it easy with tech, whereas they basically had to sail the same way than zerg.

Terran has it "easier" as you can basically shuffle your way with the add ons, but the advantage of it is counterbalanced with the fact you deny yourself some units if you lose a certain add on, so it is fair.


By the way, Chargelots are hardly a true counter to MM ball, not just because of stim abuse, but also concussive shell. Even with charge, a decent terran player would just micro their marauders group and obliterate chargelots with little casualties. And it is laughable for a race to resort of using T2-3 against a mass of T1 units.
MM ball is troublesome because it is a cookie cutter strategy that doesn't require much research and sticks with... a ridicilous T1 tech.

[oompa loompa]

As a zerg player I'm only interested in one thing with patch 1.1 .. well.. thats not true, rather I'm curious about one thing. with the extra time on reapers and zealots, will we see a return of the 14 pool 15 hatch? now THAT could make a good amount of difference.

[Kafriel]

...and I see no relevancy whatsoever. You really don't need any strategy for mass MM ball or mass roach hydra, do you?

I never said MM isn't just as cheap, if not cheaper Roaches and hydras could be used with more tactics though, depending on creep expansion, upgrades, etc.

You implied how well it can fare with the various units, but suddenly, you "just don't need every research". Yet, you are complaining of... "cheap shot" strategies, while these units need investment? I mean, yeah investing in HT, but if you don't invest with the amulet and psi storm, it is rather moot. I see little relevancy to your very first comment after all of this, since you were basically implying that protoss had it easy with tech, whereas they basically had to sail the same way than zerg.

HT is one unit, DT is another, void ray is yet another...toss are sure to use zealot+anything else, but they won't go out of their way to switch between all of these units, they pick a few and stick to them, whereas the zerg start out with zling/roach, then bling/muta/hydra and if things get tough, they'll have to invest to infestors and ultras as well. Picking out upgrades and carrying out many separate strategies for each kind of unit combination throughout the stages of a game is a lot harder than proxy gating zealots and sending in some void rays if anything survived. I'm not saying that there's no Terran player that could put you on a spot and force you to change tactics mid-game, but the zerg are a lot more prone to it, and against all races, whereas P can at least handle Z better than they can handle T or fellow P.
Back to shields: toss units cannot regen HP, so maxing their shields for surgical strikes or pure harassment would guarantee complete units. Would you keep unitswith half HP in an army, if their shields are full?
About Ghosts: proper scouting allows the ever so handy HT feedback counter, and if there's ghosts inside the enemy ball, you can blink through shells and go out of your way to snipe the perpetrator.

By the way, Chargelots are hardly a true counter to MM ball, not just because of stim abuse, but also concussive shell.

If you got stim and shells, it's safe to assume I got charge and blink. So, charge for the marines and blink for the marauders. I think that also answers the T2~3 units to counter a T1 mass...

MM ball is troublesome because it is a cookie cutter strategy that doesn't require much research and sticks with... a ridicilous T1 tech.

I believe this is why Terrans are so popular

[Klashikari]

Originally Posted by Kafriel

HT is one unit, DT is another, void ray is yet another...toss are sure to use zealot+anything else, but they won't go out of their way to switch between all of these units, they pick a few and stick to them, whereas the zerg start out with zling/roach, then bling/muta/hydra and if things get tough, they'll have to invest to infestors and ultras as well.

... What is this nonsense. All races HAVE to tech switch in a prolonged game. Massing over and over the same kind of units is the best way to get your ass hard countered. The difference is how certain combination of some units are "stronger" than others.
Zealots are only kept more or less as a base units because they have to soak damage. As much as lings are used to disrupt auto attack and surround. But by no means you can just sick around with 2-3 units for a game that go beyond 15-20 minutes.
You will never see people sticking with zea/stalkers/colossi, unless their opponent is very bad and doesn't switch into things like vikings / mutas.

Picking out upgrades and carrying out many separate strategies for each kind of unit combination throughout the stages of a game is a lot harder than proxy gating zealots and sending in some void rays if anything survived.

Proxy gate is a cheese, as much as 6pool is.

I'm not saying that there's no Terran player that could put you on a spot and force you to change tactics mid-game, but the zerg are a lot more prone to it, and against all races, whereas P can at least handle Z better than they can handle T or fellow P.

... why are you switching the discussion into a "TvZ" anyway...? We all know that Zerg has issues. But protoss has their own... why suddenly comparing the two in a direct confrontation?

Back to shields: toss units cannot regen HP, so maxing their shields for surgical strikes or pure harassment would guarantee complete units. Would you keep unitswith half HP in an army, if their shields are full?

... you really don't understand do you?
A unit with either upgrade will have their shield regenerating if they survive the tale. However, the one with the armor upgrade WILL have more chances for that:
1) more HP than shield syndrome
2) natural armor factored.

Here are the maths: Marine without any upgrade (so 6 dmg) against a zealot:
-shield upgrade +1 (so 1 shield, 1 armor): it takes the marine 10 shots for the shield, then additional 20 for the zealot HP, so total of 30
-Armor upgrade +1 (so 0 shield, 2 armor): it takes the marine 8 shots but then 26 shots. So a total of 34 shots to take down the zealot

It is simple math and logic here. Your unit will be more resilient since they have more Hp than shield in most case, and More armor = having HP = staying alive = more chance to recover the shield.
In all case, it does NOT make sense to take shield over armor, except 1 unit: Archon.

About Ghosts: proper scouting allows the ever so handy HT feedback counter, and if there's ghosts inside the enemy ball, you can blink through shells and go out of your way to snipe the perpetrator.

EMP has a -larger- range AND it is an AOE. Feedback requires you to move your slow ass HT, exposing it to the ghost AND marines, while you have to select the ghost. With players of the same skills, it is hardly possible for the protoss player to feedback before the EMP is fired. And the terran would certainly want the HT dry so they won't eat psi storm. They can also multi snipe if they don't care about the little loss of energy. For all it is worth, you -cannot- properly counter EMP at all, in a situation where both armies are balanced and both players skills are the same.

If you got stim and shells, it's safe to assume I got charge and blink. So, charge for the marines and blink for the marauders. I think that also answers the T2~3 units to counter a T1 mass...

... That's what I meant, which IS stupid.
Let's review here the issue:
Charge requires 200/200 AND twilight council
Blink requires 150/150 AND cybernetic core

meanwhile:
Stim pack requires 150/150 and tech lab
concussive shell requires 50/50 and tech lab.

Furthermore, what is any useful to use stalkers against marauders? Anyone would be a suicidal maniac, considering marauders do a wooping 20 dmg on stalkers, shield on or off. And kiting is actually not even possible because of stim packs.
There is nothing you can do, expect waiting for them to be in a choke and use forcefield, abusing the splitting reinforcement and the ramp vision (hoping your sentry isn't sniped).

Marauders just screw -every- gateway units, and you can only bet on a successful forcefield, or using higher tier units, which is stupid as heck. Even a mere 5 marauders rush can smash a conventional protoss opening.

[Alaya]

Originally Posted by -Sho-

Lol "According to IdrA's post" not surprising from this ragequitter
Seriously they just want more advantage for Zerg . I would like to see Pool 6 vs P now ! And "2 gates Zealot rush is pretty much dominate there." dude don't tell me that they don't know how to counter this rush with Z ... so easy ...

It's not about the counter or defend this rush by Zerg, it's about how much long term econ Zerg's player has to "sacrifice" in order to defend that push and transitioning into mid to late game. I think not only IdrA complains about this, CheckPrime complains about it and considering switch to Protoss because of it too if I remember correctly.

Too tire to comment about anything else right now, though. Watching MLG for 3-4 hours straight in the middle of the night is tiring, lol.

[Kafriel]

Stim packs don't come free of charge, they deal a "whooping" 20 damage per use and last for just one skirmish. Stalkers against marauders because they're anti-armour and are the first ranged units you can get.

For all it is worth, you -cannot- properly counter EMP at all, in a situation where both armies are balanced and both players skills are the same.

I'd never dare say there's an attack in a game that cannot be countered...Ghosts are T3, if you don't like the HT approach, how about DT? two strikes are enough to kill a ghost, and don't give me ravens because we can drag this till we've brought motherships in play.

... you really don't understand do you?
A unit with either upgrade will have their shield regenerating if they survive the tale. However, the one with the armor upgrade WILL have more chances for that:
1) more HP than shield syndrome
2) natural armor factored.

Here are the maths: Marine without any upgrade (so 6 dmg) against a zealot:
-shield upgrade +1 (so 1 shield, 1 armor): it takes the marine 10 shots for the shield, then additional 20 for the zealot HP, so total of 30
-Armor upgrade +1 (so 0 shield, 2 armor): it takes the marine 8 shots but then 26 shots. So a total of 34 shots to take down the zealot

It is simple math and logic here. Your unit will be more resilient since they have more Hp than shield in most case, and having HP = staying alive = more chance to recover the shield.
In all case, it does NOT make sense to take shield over armor, except 1 unit: Archon.

You're not including harassment into this though, units at half-health are a liability and an extra micro burden. Let's assume your zealot takes 9 shots: in one case he will have no real damage, while in the other his actual HP takes a hit. On the other side, let's see what happens at 30 shots: shield zealots die, armour ones live...with 16 HP and 50 shield once they recover. So you can have a bunch of zealots with 66 converted life, that's less than 50% of a brand new zealot, and this will be the army that gives you a false sense of security, and will be the first to crumble at an assault.

... why are you switching the discussion into a "TvZ" anyway...? We all know that Zerg has issues. But protoss has their own... why suddenly comparing the two in a direct confrontation?

We started with PvZ at micro (me) and macro (you). Facing terrans requires both, I believe it is logical to discuss PvT and ZvT, and present the required level of said skills on each occasion.

[Klashikari]

Originally Posted by Kafriel

Stim packs don't come free of charge, they deal a "whooping" 20 damage per use and last for just one skirmish. Stalkers against marauders because they're anti-armour and are the first ranged units you can get.

Huh no, 10hp. 15 seconds is plenty enough to wreck a clash between infantry. Hit and Run is also a viable strategy to worn down the protoss player. By the way, Stalkers are no good at all against marauders, even if they are supposed to be anti armor, "simply" because of stimpack. Even with -10hp, a marauder would slaughter a stalker just because of the drastic dps gap (20 dmg VS 14 dmg, 0.75 sec VS 1.44). You have to soak the marauders grenades with zealots and hope you can snipe marauders while having the terran forces split with FF. Going rambo with Stalkers through blink on the marauders is just suicidal.

I'd never dare say there's an attack in a game that cannot be countered...Ghosts are T3, if you don't like the HT approach, how about DT? two strikes are enough to kill a ghost, and don't give me ravens because we can drag this till we've brought motherships in play.

Ghost are T2, not T3. DT are T3.
We aren't in brood war.

You're not including harassment into this though, units at half-health are a liability and an extra micro burden. Let's assume your zealot takes 9 shots: in one case he will have no real damage, while in the other his actual HP takes a hit. On the other side, let's see what happens at 30 shots: shield zealots die, armour ones live...with 16 HP and 50 shield once they recover. So you can have a bunch of zealots with 66 converted life, that's less than 50% of a brand new zealot, and this will be the army that gives you a false sense of security, and will be the first to crumble at an assault.

Except that we are dealing with situation involving a straight prolonged battle. If you want to harass, you aren't supposed to throw your units and then withdraw them when they are about to die. And as you can see with the difference in term of shield, it doesn't take more than 2-3 shots difference for units to have their shield depleted, between upgrade or not, whereas the one without shield upgrade would still withstand better in a prolonged battle, where an harassment fails and a push is required.
Against, there is no viable reason to go for shield first, economically or efficieny speaking.

[Alaya]

Guys, I think discussing too deep into "Balancing" issue would cause unnecessary drama since different people usually have different idea about balancing imba things. And I don't think we can change anything by just discussing it here too. The patch is not even come out yet, so let's just see how it goes...

[Waven]

Originally Posted by Xion Valkyrie

aaaw that's so cute... and also, it shows why you gotta get the second queen out very soon, they're the vital part of zerg early game

[Kafriel]

Ghost are T2, not T3. DT are T3.

Well...they still cost more

[Archon_Wing]

Originally Posted by Kafriel

You're not including harassment into this though, units at half-health are a liability and an extra micro burden. Let's assume your zealot takes 9 shots: in one case he will have no real damage, while in the other his actual HP takes a hit. On the other side, let's see what happens at 30 shots: shield zealots die, armour ones live...with 16 HP and 50 shield once they recover. So you can have a bunch of zealots with 66 converted life, that's less than 50% of a brand new zealot, and this will be the army that gives you a false sense of security, and will be the first to crumble at an assault.

You have it backwards. A unit with 1 health does as much damage as one with full life. Therefore, injured units that have already fought a lot, are not really a burden because you have saved many resources from rebuilding them and you have gotten use from them. You could suicide them into something, but they are hardly a liability-- in fact they will just supplement your new units.

You can argue that a hurt army at max supply is weaker than a healthy one, but usually units die too fast anyways for this to become an issue; you're usually replacing them anyways.

Micro in Starcraft is about getting the most mileage out of a unit, and that's not always keeping them alive. The fact is most units won't survive a battle, regardless of shields or not.

Originally Posted by Klashikari

Huh no, 10hp. 15 seconds is plenty enough to wreck a clash between infantry. Hit and Run is also a viable strategy to worn down the protoss player.

Actually it is 20 for marauders.

Against, there is no viable reason to go for shield first, economically or efficieny speaking.

Yea, The main thing is that shield upgrades are much more expensive-- so usually you will upgrade weapons first to get more damage output from your units, and than armor. In many cases, more units > shield upgrade for quite a while.

[Hooves]

So upgrading the armor of your troops is a little bit longer then upgrading the weapons?

(On another hand)

I just got this replay of me barely beating this Protoss player as Zerg, it was really a close call, I would have lost to his Colossi if I dint have my Corrupters. A very close match indeed.

http://www.sc2replayed.com/replays/6...-scrap-station