|
This week's blog will be a general review of the state of Legacy of the Void from a Terran perspective. For context, I've played ~150-200 games of legacy and participated in 10+ tournaments and won a few was well.
Overall, Legacy is filled with more action than HoTS. The 2 main reasons for this are the economic changes. The starting workers means that the first ~2 minutes are gone from the game. You jump right into making your first depot/rax almost immediately and have at least some units out shortly thereafter. This removes certain early game plays such as 6 pools, proxy 1 gate, and proxy 2 rax, but there still seems to be potential for larger econ busts. The timing window that a 6 pool took advantage of doesn't really exist for the equivalent 12 pool, but things like a fast 15 hatch into ling/bane aggression off minimal drones still seem reasonable.
While some of the early builds are gone, the game benefits from their absence. Some of the most frustrating and coin-flippy builds were builds like 6 pool and so on. The early game of Starcraft becomes a little less luck based as the options for scouting open up and there's fewer threats before scouting is really an issue. Also, due to the overall stronger initial economy, you don't give up as much by scouting. For example, in HoTS many builds cut a scout because it messed up the timings so much, while in LoTV there's enough money for almost any build that a scout makes sense and does not break the build in the same way.
The other change that accelerates players into battle is the reduced resources at each base. That means that you're mining out faster and subsequently forced to fight for new bases sooner. Managing your economy and ensuring you have optimal saturation is quite difficult to adjust to as part of the base mines out sooner than the other. By expanding consistently, you can ensure a steady income. The reduced resources also means that the games generally end more decisively. If you are behind on bases and take a bad fight, the game ends pretty quickly thereafter because you won't have enough money to remax. Very few games see either player banking more than a few thousand resources and in many games, neither player maxes at all. Most of the army vs army fighting starts around 80-150 supply as players are forced onto the map to fight for new bases and the constant trading and battling means neither player is likely to max.
I'm going explain the current state of each matchup as I've seen it and understand it. Of course, the beta is always in a state of flux in terms of balance patches as well as understanding, so take my analysis with that in mind.
TvT
Both mech and bio work well in this matchup. Mass Raven and sky mech are much rarer in LoTV but still sort of happen on occasion. Although even when mass raven happens it's sort of a younger brother to the HoTS version in that there are far fewer ravens and the games are still much shorter. Cyclones don't have much of a place in this matchup as their lack of an anti-air attack and short range leaves them vulnerable to siege tanks and banshees, which are the two biggest threats. Later in the game, mech players sometimes incorporate them in place of thors as they have tremendous zoning power against enemy air units. Overall, the defining feature of this matchup is the tank drop. Being able to drop a sieged tank from a medivac has been the final nail in the coffin for bio openings, which were pretty much already dead in HoTS. The mid game is fast and frantic as tank drops dominate the bio vs bio matchup. It is also much easier to defend against doom drops to the incredible mobility of medivacs. If you've already got the tanks loaded it's very fast to move around and get in position to defend against large drops. Overall, play tends toward map control and denying resources rather than big doom drops like we've seen in hots.
TvZ
Some players mech. I've tried it extensively and liked it quite a bit until I discovered the viper. The viper has an AoE air only spell that completely crushes any viking/banshee play as well as its usual array of blinding cloud and abducts vs ground units. I'm not sure how much of a place mech has against viper armies, but I haven't experimented enough to get a good feel for it. Bio works as it did before, although it's very hard to justify going any supporting unit besides tanks due to the incredible defensive strength of lurkers. This matchup still has Terran Bio on the clock to get ahead or win by the late game or die trying as the increased armor of the ultralisks as well as reduced damage from Marauders makes end game fights even worse than before. There's a bit of potential for early game mass reaper type openings, but I expect things like 5 rax reaper fade out relatively soon as zerg players tighten up their speed timings and defense.
TvP
As with the other matchups, both mech and bio feel viable here and require drastically different responses from the Protoss. Mech is generally met by carriers, although every opening and mid game army is currently using a lot of Adepts. At 240 combined hp and shields (zealots have 150) after the upgrade, adepts are incredibly tanky and hard to deal with. They have great harassing potential and put a lot of pressure on their opponent. That being said, this is the one matchup where early game cyclones still see a lot of use. Cyclones are the only real effective response to early adepts (besides walling off and bunkering until medivacs) and do well against basically all of protoss's early ground units. There's a lot of pressure on protoss to figure out if it's a bio opening or cyclone opening so they can adjust their own build accordingly, although adepts are strong enough right now that they usually can get the information needed. Surprisingly, this is also the one matchup where reaper openings are basically dead. The adept, being very low gas and available quite quickly can deflect a cyclone very easily while also putting a lot of pressure on the map. In addition, protoss doesn't have to worry about any but the cheesiest openings when going for greedy nexus first or gate nexus style builds.
Overall, Legacy is a faster and more action filled game. You start off quicker, get into and flow through combat faster, and there's very little time in the mid game where you're not actively fighting for resources or position on the map. Some of the balance definitely feels off, but it's hard to say exactly what needs to be changed. I expect nerfs on the cyclone, viper, and adept at the very least. Protoss is suffering the most in Legacy and very few protoss players are actively playing. Balance issues aside, Protoss got the fewest new units/buffs while receiving the critical nerf to the colossus (20% damage reduction), so that right out of the gate Protoss players felt stifled and had very little to fall back on.
 
|
Like the previous post that you made, thanks Qxc. As someone that doesn't have an invite, I've found your feedback to be the most insightful with regards to where the beta is at, at the moment.
Looking forward to the next update already!
|
Do you think that the game benefits so much from the 12 worker start that it wouldn't be worth it to look into a medium between starting with the current worker count and keeping some of the early game builds? From someone who isn't professional nor has beta access it doesn't feel like the benefit of having so many works is worth the removal of 6/8/10 pool and their baneling variants, proxy 2 rax/gate, ect.
|
On May 20 2015 13:16 chipmonklord17 wrote:
Do you think that the game benefits so much from the 12 worker start that it wouldn't be worth it to look into a medium between starting with the current worker count and keeping some of the early game builds? From someone who isn't professional nor has beta access it doesn't feel like the benefit of having so many works is worth the removal of 6/8/10 pool and their baneling variants, proxy 2 rax/gate, ect.
Ya, I think 10 just makes more sense in every way
|
|
|
Thanks for the informative post. I really like the non-negative tone of it.
|
I like the 6 pool tears so much. haahahahaha :D
|
It seems like SC2 is the most fun that it's ever been right now, in LotV.
|
I'm not adverse to the idea of playing with different #'s of starting workers, but it doesn't appear broken or non-functional. Blizzard already has enough stuff that clearly needs tweaking so I'd rather they put their development efforts toward those aspects rather than continue tweaking something that more or less, works, even if it's not what many people want.
|
On May 20 2015 13:16 chipmonklord17 wrote:
Do you think that the game benefits so much from the 12 worker start that it wouldn't be worth it to look into a medium between starting with the current worker count and keeping some of the early game builds? From someone who isn't professional nor has beta access it doesn't feel like the benefit of having so many works is worth the removal of 6/8/10 pool and their baneling variants, proxy 2 rax/gate, ect.
Are these builds really necessary though? I trust players to find new ways to cheese...
|
Every single build it removed took almost no skill to pull off and ruined many boX series by being thrown in for a coinflip, It's just better for the game to have these higher econ cheeses it'll probably involve more units, more acute timings, and more skill on the whole if you'd like to take a cheese win.
|
Are Carriers used because they are actually good in LotV with their reduced buildtime, the new ability + all the other changes, or are Protoss just using them because Colossi/Immortal suck now (although I think Immortals could be better vs. mech now, no?)?
|
It does seem like the Marine killing power of Adept+Mothership Core+Oracle is a bit too much.
But the way Adepts and new Charge Movespeed allows Protoss to play Gateway units vs Bio is really nice and I could almost not return to HotS.
I don't see Adept keeping it's +Shields upgrade, but it will probably be switched for something a little more fancy.
|
God I hope they don't remove the colossi nerf.
|
thanks for another great blog post...
as i've said before Starcraft is definitely moving more and more towards the C&C "fast and fluid" philosophy.
i have fun with HotS however, LotV is a welcome change.
|
On May 20 2015 11:13 qxc wrote:
While some of the early builds are gone, the game benefits from their absence. Some of the most frustrating and coin-flippy builds were builds like 6 pool and so on.
I disagree with this a great deal as a spectator of SC2. Games like Squirtle vs Mvp where Mvp does proxy 2 rax game 7 and Life vs Parting where Life opens with 9 pool speed on a 4 player map in game 7 of the last GSL are extremely exciting and fun to watch. They're not just coin flips, they're part of the decision making process for a BoX series.
The early game of Starcraft becomes a little less luck based as the options for scouting open up and there's fewer threats before scouting is really an issue. Also, due to the overall stronger initial economy, you don't give up as much by scouting. For example, in HoTS many builds cut a scout because it messed up the timings so much, while in LoTV there's enough money for almost any build that a scout makes sense and does not break the build in the same way.
If there's a corner to cut, players will cut it. Builds aren't very refined in Legacy, so it's natural that the impact from not cutting the scout isn't well perceived, but as the game evolves it can and will happen. Also with simply how fast the game starts, worker scouting is simply less valuable in my opinion thanks to how quickly units pop out and tech is timed anyway.
Very few games see either player banking more than a few thousand resources and in many games, neither player maxes at all. Most of the army vs army fighting starts around 80-150 supply as players are forced onto the map to fight for new bases and the constant trading and battling means neither player is likely to max.
Isn't 80-150 supply a pretty normal amount for army engagements in hots? And why is the lack of maxing a feature instead of a bug? To me the failure to max supply so consistently is because of the frequency of low econ games, which is fine occasionally, but frustrating to watch and play so frequently. It will improve as players better understand how the game works and as balance changes flow down the pipeline, but I certainly don't see their increased frequency as an inherent benefit to the game as a whole.
|
regarding carriers: they're used more often in tvp because they're a generally good response to mech and can kill a meching player easily if unscouted. Vs. bio, I see them as protoss players continue to experiment trying to find a composition that works in the mid/late game. So far, TvP feels very difficult for protoss.
Regarding scouting: people are saying as builds get more refined you'll feel the lack of minerals from scouting. There may exist some builds where this is true, but right now it is almost never the case. Consider reaper expand from HoTS into factory. You literally must delay your factory if you scout because of a lack of minerals. In LoTV, these types of situations don't exist in the same way, not because the build isn't refined but because there's just enough money left over to not have to cut things super close like this, but not enough money to actually do a whole 'new' thing with it such as add an additional barracks or so on.
|
It's good to see this perspective from the Terran side of things. I can understand a lot of the reasoning, and am glad to see you think both Bio and Mech are currently viable in all three matchups. As a Random player I agree Terran seems to be headed in the right direction, albeit still in need of a few tweaks. The other two races definitely still need some work, which I am confident will happen in time. However, the most important area of consideration at this point in Beta should be Resourcing, and the effect it will have in the long run. I strongly believe some refining still needs to take place on the economic flow of the game.
Let me state reasons. The 12 Worker Start means that from a player perspective, you will always jump into tech and economy right away. This means from a spectator perspective, the game won't ever really start until a few minutes in. This means I will most likely not watch the beginning of most games, as they will be even more boring than they were previously. Sure, with 6 workers you had to get those first few buildings slower (great time for player intros on casted games) however you had the possibility of a Cheese build right away. Therefore, games were always worth watching right off the bat, because the feeling that "anything can happen" was there instantly.
4 patches per base mining out twice as fast means that armies/defense structures are no longer required to protect each base as long. This means by the time you start taking new bases and transferring workers, there is no need to protect the previous faster-mined base (with your main as the exception). While taking more bases slightly faster is a nice change, I haven't seen it spreading out the battleground into more multiprong attacks. Why would you attack a base that has been mined out?
This is why I would ask for us to consider the effect this economy model will have in the long run. Will very-early-game now always look the same? Will games eventually progress into more aggression all over the map?
What if we tried starting with 9 workers, and 200 minerals instead. You'd have a choice as to how you want to spend those first 200 minerals. Cheese builds would be worth trying occasionally even if less often, rather than removing them from the game. The cheese builds from SC2's past could still do a lot of damage, but might not be game-ending as much.
What if we made bases mine just as fast as they did in HotS, except you only needed 12 workers for full saturation on a mineral line? (6 patches per base) You'd have to expand faster throughout the game and would need less harvesters at each base, but you'd still have to defend your bases just as long as we're used to. Mineral income would be the only significant change, but should become more evened-out with gas income. You won't float as many minerals, and will have to be wiser with defensive structures, etc. It's also a more noticeable and easily digestible economy change.
Before you jump to conclusions about why you still prefer DH or the 100/60 FRB models over a 6 patch per base/9 worker-200 mineral start, I ask you to contemplate what you want SC2 to look like years away from both a player and spectator perspective.
|
As a zerg, i like the new unit change of zerg, it's rather cool units, and fun to play with, but unfortunatly the interaction with other race is pretty bad.
ZvZ : Used to be my favorite MU on HOTS as their is a great room for agression, run by, full time action, no balance issue/abusive deathball/unbalance map.
But on LOTV, the MU is become really annoying as it's just about : the fastest to rush lurker. You can have deny his B3, have more worker, more army supply, if you have later lurker tech, he beats you...
After if both have lurker, it's a kind of defensive war where you try to outposition him/air tech/nyndus/broodlords. Not that funny. I like the lurker as unit, but you lack of some counter for zerg.
IMO it will be better if lurker can only hit on 75° direction, and must be manually relocated to hit other direction. It will allow more flank/force them to protect. Or buff ravagers to allow to counter them, as they are useless in the MU.
ZvT :
The early part is pretty the same of on HOTS, but more new cheese : tank drop, hellion/hellbat - cyclon agression, and no real new way to deal with : you must go for the same roach/or fast baneling or mass queen, or fast mutas than on HOTS.
After, their is not really new room for using new unit : Except vs bio, you add some lurkers. Even if you can consider playing roach/hydra vs bio, the medivac still a big threat and force mutas.
Finally you plays it a bit like on HOTS with a few variation : you can do some lurker vs bio, or rush ultra. Vs mech, as lurker gets outranged by tank as well as ravagers (that anyway never worth in nearly any MU), you just play some T3 rush + queen, or roach/hydra/vipers with the difference than the vipers allow to beat the invincible skymech of HOTS.
ZvP :
The MU isn't really fun, as it's even more than on HOTS : rock-paper-scissors, or : get the right tech that counter the other tech.
Lurker crush the ground, disruptor too, so force some mutas/air tech that hard counter them.
Adepts all-in (1 base), are painful to play vs as the shadow outspeed all your unit, and you need some roach as adept as the same dps as a stimed 2/0 marinnes vs bio with more HP than a roach.
But must of the time on macro game (still a lot of cheese for P) the Zerg crush P as he can switch tech faster and get the hard counter tech faster than the other (if scouted ofc).
|
Italy12246 Posts
I strongly disagree that the 12 worker start removes coinflips. If anything it makes them worse.
Builds develop so much more quicky that by the time a reaper, worker, overlord or mothership core crosses the map to scout your opponent's build will already be much further along the way compared to HotS, and often times i feel like all i'm scouting for is a spawning positions. This is especially true on 4 player maps. Just as an example, imagine dealing with proxy oracle without the ability to scout for them, or even to count the pylons to know if there's a proxy or not in time.
I think things like proxies and 6pool aren't nearly as big of a deal because the coinflip aspect of them is tied to a player's choice: you either choose to ignore them, do an opening that is automatically safe against them, or you scout for them and adjust accordingly. LotV on the other hand removes the choice to scout, because it just can't be done in time (using another example, zergs are able to sac one overlord at best instead of two). You either play safe against something or you dont, without any ability to adjust during the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
