Protoss balance problem?

You have to pay for their fast regeneration, their default range, as well as their ability to blink. The dragoon had neither of those. Cost had to stay to preserve consistency after the zealot and to keep the racial trait, so hp and damage were reduced.

And this is the case with a lot of units in SC2. It'd actually be interesting to come up with a set of values for abilities and plot a balance chart of some sort. I'm sure nobody gets what I'm on about but I can't elaborate right now, nor could I do this on my own.

 

I kinda get what you're on about, but it would both take effort to do and it would be kinda difficult to quantitise upgrades, speed, range and sight radious.

As for someone who said about the zealots compared to the zerglings: It's deffinitely not early game that I feel toss have problems with them, it's late game when zerglings become imba when their lvl 3 carapace hits and are no longer 2 shottable by lots, and the creep is spread and their speed boosted by creep+upgrade and due to their low hp they absorb a crapload of damage from protoss units in the middle of the fight.

A zealot that does 32 damage in 2 hits leaves a zergling with 3 hp so the next hit is overkill by 13 points of damage! For every zergling an army of zealots kill 13 points of damage are wasted. That stacks up to quite a bit in the long run.

 

Stirlitz, I said build off of sc1.
Zlot vs zling is almost same as in sc1, im glad about that.

Kuvasz, when i was younger, I loved to do stuff like that! but im too lazy lol. I might do this one saturday if im bored.

 

Zealot vs Zling is way different than starcraft 1. In SC1 it was like what I said: Zealots did 16 damage. On 0/0/0 They took 3 hits to kill a 0/0 ling. With +1 weapons they took 2 hits to kill a ling with +1 armor or 3 hits for +2/+3 armor lings but +2 weapons for lots brought them back to 2 hits per ling regardless of armor. That was huge and made ground weapons very meaningful for protoss as zerglings that took 3 hits because they were left with like 1 hp effectively absorbed one every 2 zealot hits. Plus they also absorbed dragoon hits for 1 hp which was also bad for toss.

You could move in with zealots followed by dragoons and even with 3 hits per ling you wouldn't have that much of a problem since storm did absurd amounts of damage and killed hydras in 1 shot, so while your zealots and goons were busy with lings you could blanket the hydra line with storms and get rid of their ranged dps on your frontal units.

Right now storm does not kill hydras(unless they stay inside from start to finish) and they do more damage than in sc1, so having your army spend more time with the zerglings which asside from doing good damage themselves are very cheap cannon fodder will redirect both colossi attacks from the hydras to the lings till they die(which will let the hydras attack more) but also storms won't kill hydras anymore so you can't use templar as effectively.

I don't think that building off of sc1 would work tbh, because the new armies have different things to balance. Just bringing in the sc1 numbers won't work cause we have new and different units and the balance won't be the same, while copying the unit mechanics from sc1 would only bring back an old game with new graphics and some cool macro tools.

This on the other hand would be an awsome thing to have in addition to starcraft 2. A SC:BW remake with the starcraft 2 engine, that is. I'm not sure if it's gonna have the same feel(having so many things in mind in 1 with so little macro tools could feel a little strange, but oh well...

 

The zealot versus zergling matchup is exactly the same as in BW regarding damage output, armour, and 2-shotting lings. In BW the double attack of the zealot was not indicated on the panel, but the damage was actually done in two hits, with armour being applied in both hits.

 

Are you sure about that? I was like 100% sure it was the way I described! Damn, you're breaking my world appart today! :O

 

The "weapons first in PvZ" and the "armour first in ZvP" was a key guide even in SC

 

OK, fine. Now you've "corrected" your "typo," and it's really six minutes and thirty-two seconds. I'd still like to see exactly how you do this build, because it's still obviously impossible.

Just so it's clear, having two fully-saturated vespene geysers for 6:30 yields about 1456 gas. So on one base, you cannot get 2700 gas in 6:30, let alone spend that much gas in time to get your units complete. I guess you must be doing a fast-expand to get more gas, huh? Let's assume that you're doing this on two bases, because obviously you're not getting three bases in 6:32 and also producing a strong, high-tech army.

As you surely know, an assimilator takes 30 seconds to build. Let's pretend that you have 12 probes, for free, at the beginning of the game, and they don't cost any supply, but these probes can only build assimilators and harvest gas. And you have 300 extra minerals, which is enough for 4 assimilators. And you have 4 geysers at your main instead of 2. I am effectively giving you two bases' worth of gas income for free, and your build still won't work. Proof again:

So, in the first 2 seconds of the game, you start building 4 assimilators, and queue your gas probes to harvest as soon as they come up, which is 30 seconds into the game. You now have 6:00 (360 seconds) to harvest gas. You will harvest roughly 2688 gas in that time. Still not enough to pay for what you claim to build! And you still don't have the gas early enough to start building that last round of colossi or whatever in time to finish by the 6:32 mark!

What the hell, man? Your build is gas-impossible even if you got free, pre-built probes, and free minerals to build assimilators, and four geysers instead of two!

I'm giving you all of these impossible advantages and your build still isn't even possible. Either you are the worst liar ever or you need to go back and watch your replays and look at the little timer, or check out the "build order" tab after a game finishes. How can a "rank 33 diamond" player have no idea what's possible and what isn't? I mean, this build is not even close to possible.

I'm a silver 1v1 player, gold 2v2. I suck at this game. I am nowhere near diamond, or even platinum. But even at my low level, I can tell at a glance that your build order is not remotely possible. I can even assume perfect macro/micro, and ignore minerals, and give you a bunch of free stuff, and the build still can't possibly work out.

Your build, even the "typo-corrected" version of it, is flat-out impossible. You are complaining about "balance" because you are very bad at the game. You are so bad at the game that you aren't even familiar with the difference between "possible" and "obviously impossible" builds, and you are so bad at lying that you didn't even check to see if it was reasonable. Again, prove me wrong with a replay.

Or just spend some time actually learning to play, instead of making up lies about how good you are and how the game is made wrong because you can't win.

 

I always followed that but I was pretty sure till you made that post that made the universe implode on me that zealots did all the damage in 1 hit.
And your post having coincided with the recent discovery of a 1GB ram stick in my PC that was never supposed to be there and I never remember purchasing and installing while I also never remember getting the PC out of the house since purchase, is causing my some serious distrust in my memory. I'm now positive I could have killed somebody in the past and have forgotten about it...:wacko:

 

Zealots hit twice in SC1 (and SC2). Firebats in SC1 actually hit three times, I believe, but showed the combined damage of two hits. Weird!

Anyway, yes, having multiple hits per attack does work that way. Armor gets applied each time, so a Thor's anti-air attack actually gets armor applied against it four separate times. Also, the Raven's Point Defense Drone has to block each attack individually, so the Thor's anti-air attack will drain 40 energy from an enemy PDD, whereas a hydralisk's attack only drains 10. And lastly (haven't tested this one), I believe that an immortal with 10 shields will get the "hardened shields" bonus against the first missile a banshee fires, but take the regular damage amount from the second, since the shields are now down.

Since a banshee's damage is 12 per missile, and an immortal has a base armor of 1 anyway, the banshee is almost unaffected by hardened shields, dealing 20 damage while shields are up, and 22 when they're down. This is the one thing that I haven't tested, so it could be wrong, but I don't think it is.

No. Wrong. Bad. If "any unit" should win as long as you make a lot of it, then why would I ever do anything other than reactor-barracks and pump marines? Why would you build high templars when you could just mass zealots and win? If I make a ton of battlecruisers, and the other guy makes a ton of vikings, I should not win. I do not "deserve" to win just because I made a lot of some unit type. There is an element of macro and economy here, but there's also an element of rock-paper-scissor, or "this counters that."

A handful of battlecruisers should mop up a big number of marines. Dollar for dollar, vikings should beat battlecruisers. And 1500 minerals of vikings should lose to 1500 minerals of marines. If these counters didn't exist, there would be no point to having multiple races, and there would be no point to having more than two unit types per race. The whole game would just be "worker unit" and "fighter unit" and that's it.

 

Yes, banshees do 20 damage per attack to immortals as do thors, so it only takes 5 attacks before the shield is down. And damn, I didn't know that about the firebat attacking thrice but showing the dmg of 2 attacks either.
It's been ~9 years since I quit broodwar though so I'll throw that down as an excuse, lol

 

Ya decrease in hp from firebat hit was always fishy...

Yo, I seriously doubt that a geyser produces 112 gas per minute.
I will average one geyser, 3 probes, to around 3 gas per second. thats 180 gas a minute. That means ~350 gas a minute total. Which sounds....a bit too low o.o

 

It's in-game minute, not real-time minute, since game runs at faster

 

OK, that's a fair challenge. I just glanced at one of my old replays and saw the 112 when I had one geyser up, so it's my mistake if the number was off. Here's the full analysis with charts and graphs and all the bells and whistle, as posted on Team Liquid's Wiki: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Mining_Minerals

According to that, a saturated geyser yields 114 gas per minute, slightly higher than my 112 figure. As has already been mentioned, we are talking "game minute" and not "real minute" here.

Even if my numbers are slightly inaccurate, the bottom line is that ouk's build is way impossible. For example, maybe we could have dropped his gas cost to 2650, since he won't need Warp Gate to get 20 stalkers out of 4 gates in 6:32. But this is a tiny issue compared to the ridiculous time and resource requirement of what he claims to build.

If you think that his build is possible, please try this: Play against a "Very Easy" AI on the "novice" maps (the ones with rocks blocking the chokes) and try it. This way, you won't have to scout or worry about rushes or anything else. Or just play against a friend, and tell him not to attack you. Play on any standard 1v1 ladder map. Expand to your natural if you want. Just see if you can possibly harvest 2700 (or 2650) gas in 6:32.

If it is actually possible to do that (which I doubt), and you somehow succeed, then I want you to look at your leftover minerals. And here's where we kill this build with minerals:

Spoiler

[0] Pylon: 8 * 100 = 800 (20 stalkers = 5 full pylons, 4 colossi = 3 full pylons)
[800] Gateway: 4 * 150 = 600
[1400] CC: 1 * 150 = 150
[1550] Robofac: 2 * 200 = 400
[1950] Robobay: 1 * 200 = 200
[2150] Stalker: 20 * 125 = 2500
[4650] Colossus: 4 * 300 = 1200
[6850] Twilight Council: 1 * 150 = 150
[7000] Blink: 1 * 150 = 150
[7150] Extended Thermal Lance: 1 * 200 = 200
[7350]

Holy hell, you need 7350 minerals on top of whatever you spend on your second nexus and your third nexus and your six assimilators and probes and the pylons that the probes use up. There's no way you have that much money left over.

And even if you did, you'd have to be able to spend that money right from the start and keep pouring it out constantly to have those troops done in time.

 

I think you're right

Also even the Raven has some weapons, where toss has Warp Prism (Ok but no abilities)
I really need some more power playing toss.

 

Gief arbiters back and change mothership's skills to zomfguberpwnage stuff!

 

Increasing the power radius of a Warp Prism would be nice. Not a big deal though.

Having Observers trained in the Cybernetics Core would be interesting too. Then you could choose between fast detection/scout and fast Warpgates. Also means you're more easily able to tech Templar or Air early on without being blind.

 

nonono, observers at the core would be much too imbalanced detection. First off you wouldn't need a building for it since core is a core building whatever tech you go for. Terran need starport+techlab and zerg need lair getting the observer from the core would be like getting the overseer from the roach warren or the raven from the factory next to the hellion.

Teching templar or air early or getting a fast observer is a choice you have to make and it should remain so. Getting stealth and stealth detection that fast is just not good for balance.

 

Well, I find this topic interesting.

I am a 3v3 player. I've played Starcraft 1 for > 8 years and I was considered one of the best in my country in team games. I rarely played 1on1.

I still think 3v3 is the best game mode in SC 2. Most of my games are 3v3 (I play some 2v2 too and, rarely, some 4v4). I am Diamond league in 3v3, rank ~30.


In my humble opinion, stalkers are too weak. Sure, they blink, they are relately fast... but they are worthless against most units unless that are massed. And for the price it takes for massing stalkers, we're better doing something else. I guess putting stalkers too strong could make the game unbalanced (having strong units that are fast and blink and relatively easy to get would make the game a bit unbalanced). I don't do many stalkers and I still manage to win most of my games with Protoss (team games, that is). They could lower the price of the stalkers (slightly).

I also think zealots should be a little bit stronger. There is a big difference considering zealots vs zerglings in sc 2.


Still, overall I don't agree protoss are weaker than zerg or terran. I usually play Random and I am a good overall player, no matter what race. I am not a gosu with any race, but I can play well with any of them. I prefer playing with Protoss (although I usually choose Random) and I think it might be the race I play better with. Immortals, Voids and Colossus usually make the difference between winning and loosing.

 

Stirlitz, I agree with the return of the Arbiters. Blizzard can do it, I believe in them, if only the least bit. They will have overlapping roles if the mothership was not changed to be moaruberpwnagelikecosairdominatoromgimgoingtoorgasminmymouthandgargleinjoyaswhitestuffcomesout.