Patch 1.3.3 is now live!

[Skyze]

I've played all 3 races at a Grandmaster (top 200) level. and Protoss is not the easiest. I would say that goes to Terran by far, outside of TvT (which is just a lame matchup).. But if you think protoss is the easiest race, I'll challenge you like everyone else to play it and get top 200. Protoss is the weakest race at the TOP level (im talking Masters and above).. And the stats everywhere recently prove it.

Even OUTSIDE of Korea, the games recorded in the TLPD were added up from 1.3 to 1.3.2 so far, and Protoss has lower win percentages by at least 2% over the other two races. That is not boding well, considering Protoss is the only race where you have TOP level players that carry the race, while everyone else puts up bad results. Im talking Naniwa and his 36 box's won in a row, and MC winning everything. Without those two, the TLPD would probably be 40% protoss wins, which is almost the weakest since the game has been in retail.

(TLPD is a database of all international tournaments, therefor when talking about BALANCE, the game was balanced for money tournaments, not bronze league)

Patch 1.3 - 1.3.2
Non-mirror games: 3358
IMBA: 6.9%
TvZ: 619-554 (52.8%)
ZvP: 516-461 (52.8%) - MEANS PROTOSS ONLY WINS 47.2% VS ZERG!
PvT: 588-620 (48.7%) - self-explanatory, but 48.7% vs terran too!

Honestly, You really have to play protoss to understand how such minute details will win you or lose you the game. I guanrentee that anyone here would have major difficulties getting in Grandmaster or above 700 masters with it if you haven't played it already for 100+ games. Sure, at lower levels, Protoss is probably stronger, but at the top levels where you aren't playing idiots, you REALLY have to squeeze every single unit out to even compete with the mass MMM or roach/hydra/etc.. Its small things in the matchup that new players dont realize because they are just watching the top players like MC win with Protoss.. but theres a significant difference between MC and your average diamond player.

It took me over 500 games to perfect every little detail of my Protoss playing, everything down to correct building placements (which is way more important to simcity than the other 2 races) and knowing the exact unit combination needed to deal with MMM (if you have too much zealots, they die instantly, but not enough zealots and you get run over).. Defending the terran drop, knowing what mix of zeal/stalker to warp in, because 4marauder drop can take out 8 stalkers alone if thats all you warp in. Theres about 50 more too, I could go on all day. All these little tricks are required when playing anyone good, you cant just join a game, get 4gates and attack. That wont work vs anyone above diamond league.

But keep thinking protoss is the strongest. We'll see in another 3 months when PvT goes from 47% to 42% now that the ghost is so cheap. A ghost is the same gas cost as a Sentry?? I think I'd rather have a unit that can drain 16 stalkers down to almost no HP, than one measly forcefield. Like I said though, Blizzard will revert the ghost back to 150 gas next patch once they realize it was a mistake.

Im not saying Protoss is unplayable like all the zerg players whine about.. I can still win with any race vs any other race (except TvT).. but these patch changes are not good for balance, when they nerf protoss even more despite the statistics proving if anything, Protoss needs some help. I don't agree with nerfing protoss this hard just to fix a "boring" mirror match, cause it totally hurts the other matchups which actually NEED the help.
.
.

[JackhammerIV]

Situation report for patch 1.3.3 is up...

Straight from the bridge of the Hyperion we bring you the latest situation report for StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty. In this edition, we'll be discussing some of the most notable changes in the recently released patch 1.3.3 and shedding some more light on our design philosophy and the thinking behind this update.

Balance Changes

Protoss


* Archons


o Now a massive unit.

o Range increased from 2 to 3.





After receiving and reviewing a lot of solid feedback about the archon from the StarCraft II community, we came to the agreement that having archons break Force Fields would increase strategic variety in protoss-vs.-protoss matchups. We were slightly worried that strategies such as mass Charge zealots plus archons would be too difficult to stop with only ground units, but in testing this on the PTR, we found that the relationship between the zealot- and archon-based strategies vs. the more standard robo-tech builds were proving to be fun.

Archons have generally been a slightly weak unit for their cost. This was a conscious design decision that we made since we wanted Morph to Archon to be a "recycle" ability. However, due to the size of the archon, we felt an increase in attack range was necessary so that the unit can get attacks in more easily, especially on the defensive.


* Cybernetics Core


o Research Warp Gate time increased from 140 to 160.




* Gateway


o Sentry train time decreased from 42 to 37.

o Warp Gate unit train times remain unchanged.




* Pylon


o Pylon power radius has been decreased from 7.5 to 6.5.





These three changes were made specifically to address the 4-gateway issue. The slight increase in Warp Gate research time should only really affect early-game strategies such as the 4-gate all-in. It was a challenge to find a research time high enough to achieve this goal without affecting other, non-early game strategies, but we eventually settled on 160. Regarding the sentry, it's the only tier-1 unit that's rarely used on the offensive in PvP 4-gate all-ins. However, they're almost always used on the defensive, so buffing this unit was the way to go in order to make defending easier.

The pylon power radius reduction will help the defending player take them out easier from above ramps, as well as make it so there are limited spots below cliffs where the opponent can build them in order to offensively warp in above. On the flip side, because protoss bases generally have plenty of pylon power, we’re not too worried about this affecting the defensive side too much -- though players might need to pay more attention to their base layouts.

On top of these changes, we're also looking into slightly changing how vision works on ramps so that if you use Force Field on your ramp just right, the opposing protoss player will not be able to spawn above your ramp or Blink stalkers up past a perfectly positioned Force Field. We will continue to monitor how the changes we made in 1.3.3 are working out before making the final call.

We hope these changes will resolve the 4-gate issue in PvP.

Terran


* Bunker


o Salvage resource return reduced from 100% to 75%.





This change was one of the most frequently requested by the community, and players made a lot of valid arguments as to why this change was necessary. We've seen too many bunker rushes vs. zerg, and we felt that adjusting the salvage return rate would be a positive change. Players will also have to think about mineral loss before constructing multiple bunkers on the defensive, which also feels right.


* Ghost


o Cost changed from 150/150 to 200/100





This cost change was a strategic, high-level change. We wanted ghosts to have a place in as many of the existing unit compositions out there as possible. For example: we wanted at least a few ghosts to come into play with the standard armies we currently see in each matchup. We feel ghost EMP is a vital tool at the highest skill levels, and we didn’t like how players had to choose between ghosts or something else. Therefore, we decided to keep the total costs the same while decreasing the gas cost so that they can more easily be added to whichever army terran players are currently using.

We realize having to manage so many units (including the ghost) can be difficult for many players, but at the same time we felt ghosts are only really vital at the highest skill levels because their counter-units are also micro-intensive.


* Thor


o Thor now has 200 max energy, and starts with 50 energy.

o 250mm Strike Cannons now cost 150 energy to use (cooldown removed).





We generally haven’t reverted changes in the past, but at the same time, we’re not afraid to revert changes when we feel that we’ve made a mistake. Some rare strategies involve mass numbers of Thors using 250mm Strike Cannons to lock down protoss, leaving them with few options for response. While these situations are rare, and the strategies aren’t necessarily overpowered, there were still a few things we didn’t like.

First, we definitely don’t like seeing Thors en masse. Due to the visual size of the unit, as well as a small pathing radius, Thors can obscure the other units in your army too easily. This can be problematic because it's important to know roughly how many units an opponent has when scouting. We want the Thor to be the type of unit that you add to your main army, and we definitely don’t want them to be the core of your army to the point where you strive to build as many as possible.

Second, we felt counter relationships were turning too heavily. The nature of lockdown abilities in general is that they have the potential to heavily turn the tide of battle against armies that would otherwise counter your units. Most of these abilities, especially for an ability as strong as this one, have to be fairly difficult to bring out and easier to counter. We feel that having the additional counters of EMP/Feedback to the Strike Cannons ability is better so that we don’t get into degenerating situations where the opponent is stuck without recourse.

Zerg


* Infestor


o Speed decreased from 2.5 to 2.25.





We like how infestors have been functioning across the board since the last patch. We feel the previous infestor buffs heavily contributed to making matchups solid, especially at the higher skill levels.

However, it was slightly problematic in some scenarios where infestors were getting away too easily. Even when it was off of creep, the infestor was slightly faster than normal units -- and on creep, it was considerably faster. We decided to give infestors normal movement speed off of creep to make it easier to catch up to them and kill them.


* Spore Crawler


o Root time decreased from 12 to 6.





Air-based strategies vs. zerg are common due to zerg anti-air units coming out later than other races. Because of this, it actually makes sense for spore crawlers to be more flexible than other races' anti-air structures. If a zerg player is totally unprepared, we don't mind them just outright losing the game. However, what we didn't like was when zerg players still suffered considerable damage from void rays, phoenixes, and banshees, despite being prepared with spore crawlers that were slightly out of position. We decided to make this change so that it's somewhat easier to fend off these attacks, especially when you already have some spore crawlers in play.

As a side note, we don't feel the same way about spine crawlers, as there are being plenty of other anti-ground units zerg players can use along with the spine crawlers from the beginning of the game.

************

As always, we will continue to listen to players' discussions, and we welcome your constructive feedback. As with any balance-related change, we've made these with a lot of care and consideration to ensure a great game experience for players of all skill levels.

http://sea.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/140933#blog

[sandwich_bird]

I don't agree with their reasoning behind the Thor changes.

"we definitely don’t want them to be the core of your army to the point where you strive to build as many as possible."

I'll make whatever I want Blizz, k thanks! There finally was an alternative to going mmm against protoss and they just decide to lock it up. It might still be a viable strat with the gas cost of the ghost being reduced but we'll see.

[RamiZ]

I don't agree with their reasoning behind the Thor changes.



I'll make whatever I want Blizz, k thanks! There finally was an alternative to going mmm against protoss and they just decide to lock it up. It might still be a viable strat with the gas cost of the ghost being reduced but we'll see.

I think they wanted to say that Thor shouldn't be so strong that is considered to be the core unit in your army, like Marauders are in Bio Army. They should be Heavy Support units, at least in their eyes, it looks like it.

[protoswarrior]

Question to Skyze and Jackhammer:

Is Protoss easier or harder to use in terms of decision-making vs the other races?

I totally agree with you that Protoss is the easiest to learn to play with, but the HARDEST to master. Those intricacies about keeping each individual unit alive is especially true because their major spellcasters (Sentries and High Templar) are weak as hell and expensive on gas, a resource that is more important to Protoss than it is to other races since the huge gas drain starts from early game phases.

I was curious what you think about the decision-making process, because sooo many times, I have found that choosing the right time as to WHEN to battle is more important than microing the battle itself. This kind of dilemma is less important for Terran or Zerg because that kind of decision is not made until lategame for them. Protoss still has to be extremely careful in midgame to not die to drops, counterattacks, multi-pronged harass, nydus attacks, speedlings, baneling drops, etc.

[JackhammerIV]

Well the general decision of "Let me defend until 200/200 and kill him" works quite well. General defense from drops etc applies to all races. Decision-making wise zerg is the hardest because of their "Drone or Unit" dilemma. For protoss most of the hard decision-making revolves around the sentry....

Guardian shield now?? Block him off with FF?? FF in half?? FF to trap him??

[Skyze]

Question to Skyze and Jackhammer:

Is Protoss easier or harder to use in terms of decision-making vs the other races?

I totally agree with you that Protoss is the easiest to learn to play with, but the HARDEST to master. Those intricacies about keeping each individual unit alive is especially true because their major spellcasters (Sentries and High Templar) are weak as hell and expensive on gas, a resource that is more important to Protoss than it is to other races since the huge gas drain starts from early game phases.

I was curious what you think about the decision-making process, because sooo many times, I have found that choosing the right time as to WHEN to battle is more important than microing the battle itself. This kind of dilemma is less important for Terran or Zerg because that kind of decision is not made until lategame for them. Protoss still has to be extremely careful in midgame to not die to drops, counterattacks, multi-pronged harass, nydus attacks, speedlings, baneling drops, etc.

NOTE: ALL THESE COMMENTS ARE REGARDING TOP LEVEL PLAY, in lower levels, I do understand how Protoss would be the strongest.

Every race has a significantly different PLAYSTYLE. this is what confuses people. To one person, playing zerg might actually be EASY, and playing protoss is HARD. I have friends who just have no idea how to maintain their chronoboosts or effectively use their warpins, yet they are masters level zergs. And on the flip side, some people just cant understand how zerg works, and they end up thinking zerg is incredibly weak (Idra fits into this category, he is not made for zerg, as his micro and gamesense is poor, he should play terran IMO like he did in BW)

I personally, think zerg is easier to play in most ways, yet its a race where you have to be ontop of your macro. In other words, If I was to try and be a "progamer" (ie spend more than 2 hours a day on SC2), I would automatically play zerg, because as long as I am not rusty in my macro, I can dominate with my gamesense and micro. Protoss, obviously macro isnt as hard, therefor I can take a week or two off, and come back and still play at a top level.

What Protoss has harder, is the decision making. You really have to understand the game flow to play Protoss at a top level, understanding the exact timings of when drops are coming (vs terran) or understand when zerg is going to take their 3rd/4th/etc. You have to be very opportunistic in when you attack, because theres many points in the game where protoss is super weak, but other points where protoss is strong as hell. Exactly like you said. This is why, to a diamond player, Protoss played by MC looks imbalanced. His gamesense is crazy good. Then you see lesser Protoss players crumble horribly.

Protoss Micro is the biggest thing, because your army is so immobile, you have to get the most out of every attack. Sloppy micro will kill you, this is why a player like Artosis is performing so bad in NASL, he is a terran from BW who is used to macroing like crazy, but basically throwing his army away. As a protoss, he is very sloppy with micro and often loses because of it, despite his macro being superb (on a GSL level).. Artosis should go back to playing terran or zerg, yet hes having fun with P so all the power to him.

A perfect example of a talented protoss player, is someone like Kiwikaki. The guy has phenomenal gamesense and micro, and takes advantage of whatever situation the opponent gives him. His gameplay consists of 1000s of hours of perfecting tiny details to make him what he is, and if someone like IdrA switched to Protoss, it would take him months to get to Kiwikaki's level. Naniwa is like Kiwikaki but even MORE polished. This is also why most WC3 players choose Protoss, as WC3 was a game entirely based around decision making and micro, while BW was more of a macro game, where you didnt really need to have Boxer-like micro, just as long as you kept up with your production.

As far as the races difficulty goes, like I said its hard because some people have such different skillsets, it can vary greatly from person to person. I had a student in BW who was like.. top notch macro, like B or B+ on iccup, but he suicideded EVERY army he had with horribly sloppy control.. It was almost comical, it looked like silver (sc2) / D (iccup) micro, but he could just outproduce everyone in his skillrange so bad he'd often win by literally attack-moving tanks to his opponent. So, my point there is, some people can macro like its nothing, while others struggle as hell with it (myself included). In that case on BW, Terran is the race to play as opposed to Z or P which required effectiveness of units used. (such as the reaver)

When I teach people Starcraft, I ask them tons of questions to try to understand how they play, and then suggest a race to them based off those questions, but of course then comes the "Fun" factor. You have to have fun playing obviously, which supercedes everything else. Artosis playing Protoss, hes having fun, so while he has some weak spots, it gives him something to strive to learn more than if he played Terran and just dominated everyone but didnt have fun.

My feeling on the rankings (its not this cut and dry, lots more overlap)

GAMESENSE / DECISION MAKING
Hardest - Protoss
Medium - Zerg
Easiest - Terran

MACRO
Hardest - Zerg
Medium - Terran
Easiest - Protoss

MICRO
Hardest - Protoss / Zerg (this is close, its about 55/45)
Easiest - Terran

Zerg and Protoss are both hard but in different ways; because zerg decision making is VERY important early/mid, yet once you have the map lategame, it comes down to macroing your ass off rather than microing. Protoss, while earlygame it has the hardest micro (one missed forcefield and you lose) lategame its micro is easier (except for PvT) but knowing when to attack/overall gamesense is the hardest of any race.

I think we can all agree Terran right now, is the easiest race. Its very safe/immune to most cheeses and allins (except proxy voidray if caught offguard), its micro is very minimal with MMM (again, until lategame TvP), and they transition well in every stage of the game. I pity those who have to play TvT's, but that goes into the personal playstyle, I dont have the patience to play terran. Terran requires the most patience of any race, but is just the most solid/robust race.

IN CONCLUSION: to answer your question, It comes down to playstyle, while I think one race may be harder, you may think its easy. People who say Protoss is easier, need to actually play it and realize how hard it is, and hell if they find it easy (ie can get GM no problem) then maybe it just fits your style better.. maybe you have an internal struggle with the race you currently play thats holding you back (IdrA with zerg, as micro and gamesense is his weakest aspect). Like I said previously, I've spent 3 months playing Terran, and I've beaten some of the top players on the grandmasters level.. but I dont have the patience to use tanks unsieging and slowly moving, or enjoy the liftoff/banshees/raven/thors/hellion mechanics. Doesnt mean the race sucks, but I'll always hate playing terran even if I can beat top players with them at times.

I do think Zerg is the "hardest to master" .. but I also think zerg is the strongest race, and will always be the strongest race in SC2 unless the expansion adds something dramatic to T/P. Assuming the players had perfect micro/macro/everything, No terran or Protoss could match against a zerg. Zerg played at a top level is down right scary, think Jaedong level zerg where Terran is weaker than BW. Thats how I feel about the game.

[JackhammerIV]

Nice post Skyze. I would think the other races also have the same need to know the timings of tech/expansions/etc. I don't really have a clear idea though since I've almost exclusively played protoss.

I've never really had a complicated thought process on deciding when to attack. If i think i can kill him i just go for it. LOL.

[Todie]

it might be that Protoss is / seems easier on a sub-master level, because a well composed protoss army is very hard to engage even in good circumstances... when the protoss palyer is playing against someone whos somewhat struggling with unit control, this situation is 'easy' to abuse.

..on a higher level of play, the opponents to the P player might perform more consistently near optimally when it comes to engaging that well composed ball of death.

Z and T surely have similar advantages that relates in intricate ways to how well controlled they are, but to me personally, this mentioned protoss advantage strikes me as most distinctive and perhpas most commonly abused sucesfully

.. to further relate this to the Skyze post; i guess, if the enemy of the P controls well, every tactical decision and micromanagement-feat becomes all the more important for the P, to keep his army alive and efficient.

[TheEconomist]

MICRO
Hardest - Protoss / Zerg (this is close, its about 55/45)
Easiest - Terran

I agree.

And, it's a DAMN shame, when you look back to SCBW. Being a good Terran player used to mean something.