|
Since this whole topic degenerated into the usual balance flamefest where every topic ends up if unmoderated it's time for it to clean up. Locking this down for a while. Any posts made after my post [page 233] not addressing the changes in this patch directly and containting flames or general balance whine will get banned for at least a week. ~Nyovne
There is way too much flaming in this thread right now. Calm down before you post! (Page 271) ~iamke55 |
On August 26 2011 10:51 link0 wrote:
HSM will still be useless outside of lategame T v T, I don't even understand why they changed it. It's the 2nd worst spell in the game after 250mm cannons.
Cannons render immortals completely useless.
|
On August 26 2011 10:33 Dommk wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2011 10:00 Fuzzmosis wrote:On August 26 2011 09:22 Dommk wrote:On August 26 2011 07:59 Fuzzmosis wrote:On August 26 2011 07:50 Dommk wrote:On August 26 2011 07:43 Fuzzmosis wrote:On August 26 2011 07:35 Dommk wrote:Cast 2 storms on a group of 21 hold position zealots (In shockinlyg perfect formation for this situation) and you kill 21 zealots for 150 energy over 8 seconds.
Cast 2 Seeker Missles on 21 hold position zealots (also, in startlingly tight and perfect formation) and you kill 5 (And leave 8 undamaged) for 250 energy (and in about 1 second unless you cast right over top the unit, which means friendly fire will nuke a Raven)
How did you work this out 0o? I can't find the damage calculations for Seeker as the unit is further away from the centre of the explosion. And by 8 Zealots being undamaged, you mean they only took shield damage correct? But now lets make a comparison, 2 Storms on a group of Zealots running away and you won't scratch them, 2 Seekers on a group of Zealots running away and you still have the same result. 8 seconds is a really LONG time That came from a day when I 2xHSM'ed an attacking Zealot army that was mobile and did around 400 damage, then decided to go to Yee olde Unite Testere (With Extra E's!) And test just how much damage HSM did. It wasn't pretty. Actually, going off memory, I think I couldn't hit 2 zealots with the storms, so only 19 died. My apologies on that. I actually mean that it didn't do any damage at all. Baneling explosion without fall off has a larger damage range than HSM even at it's 25 damage range. Also, you're wrong. 2 Storms on a group of zealots running away and you'll do maybe 40 shield damage to all of them (Kinda similar to what 2 Emps would do). 2 HSM's on a group of zealots running away and you'll do 0 damage because HSM needs to be cast only when someone isn't paying attention or is moving towards you (And because of friendly fire, is very dangerous to cast a HSM on a 150 hp zealot charging towards 6 55 hp marines. It's pretty awkward to need to kite your own spell) I don't understand how it can do 0 damage when the Spell has a 33% greater AOE than Psi-Storm. If Psi-Storm can hit 19 Zealots, then Seeker should be able to hit 25 Seeker Missile is almost 0.25 Speed faster than a Chargelot (0.75 faster than a regular one). If you Seeker Missile a Zealot in the middle of the pack, there is almost no chance it can be micro'd away. But for all intensive purposes, if it can be hit by Storm then it can be hit by Seeker Missile. But different Spells are different. Psi-Storm can only ever do 20DPS per 1.5radious AOE. Multiple Seekers on the other hand can be chained, which makes the spell significantly stronger when the Raven number increases So... let's see here. I cast a missile that is 9 distance away from an already retreating zealot, moving .75 speed faster. You're saying that in 12 seconds, the zealots cannot be scattered. I'm worried about your opinion of protoss players. Again, if they are charging or not retreating, different story, but this is your example. (IF they have charge, if they are retreating, they can't even be hit if durable materials DOUBLED the length because the missile craps out) For the damage range, I have no idea why. I did the test in a unit tester. Maybe the map maker modified the HSM in that case, but storm was more effective than HSM period for less energy. Even 1 cast. You're free to clump up high HP units (And low HP units) and give it your own test. You may come back and say "Fuzzy, you screwed up, clearly you did it wrong" or "Huh. That's stupid". Either or, but please do try it since your other explanations have worried me. Oh cool, so you start talking shots at me as well. Guess I see where this is going. First part is obviously wrong, which is worrying when a Terran player doesn't even know the cast range of their own spells nor the mechanics... Second part, it makes no sense what so ever that in YOUR example there were MORE Zealots that took NO damage from HS than with Psi Storm. Hunter Seeker has a _33%_ greater AOE. So all it means is your tests were incredibly faulty when something basic as a spell with greater AOE hitting less units standing still than a Spell with smaller AOE. I really can't take your "Tests" very seriously at all, sorry NInja Edit, like you!
Yes, Psi Storm does have the potential to hit your own zealots. Not going to even try to deny that. But being a cheap, instant cast that can be produced easier than a Raven (Less Gas, less wait, 5 second summon) that does more damage over an area (You keep calling that into question, I keep telling you to test) doing friendly fire or a suicide attack is better than a detector with other useful spells suiciding because of a terrible, terrible spell. In addition, you need to march your own units into the spell. HSM can be led into your own units (Assuming amazing Micro, or amazing luck). I'm sorry, you may act like I'm being snide by disregarding your "Tests", but they ARE faulty. I mean, a spell with 1.5 AOE hits more units than a spell with 2.0 AOE. I can't understand how when something as basic as that is wrong that you wouldn't somehow think you fucked up your tests in one way or another. High Tempalrs put a 45second cooldown on warpgates. Protoss does have flexibility with warpgate units, but you just can't create whatever you want whenever you want, you have to juggle cooldowns to create a proper balanced army. A raven costs 50/50 more than a Templar, but the benefits? It provides Detection, most almost twice as fast, it can fly AND has other spells which can greatly benefit the Terran army. Obviously due to the convenience of Tech labs and such compared to Warpgates, a Protoss WILL have more Templars in their army, but there is nothing wrong with that. Different races will have different units, but at least damage wise, Seeker Missile has the same energy efficiency as a 3second Storm which is pretty goddamn good if you consider that all its damage is BURST as opposed to a 20dps AOE--you would except something that does it's damage over a longer period of time with a smaller AOE in a static location would be more efficient if a unit stands in it for the full duration. A Hunter Seeker could be lead into your army, but the only Melee unit Terran actually has is an SCV--good luck trying to lead Seeker Missile into ranged Units that move faster than it and have soo much DPS that they can almost instantly snipe whatever that unit is Guess what I did? I tested. You are correct, and the raven does have a larger splash radius. For instance, If a group of 35 zerglings are clumped up, 22 will survive but all take damage, whereas for a storm, 16 will survive but not take any damage (Unless they, you know, run through the storm, seeing as they only lasted 2 seconds). I apologize for that inconsistancy, you are entirely correct that the range is larger. I suppose I remembered wrong. Now, try it out for yourself. Do it. (Note, clumped up means a perfect circle, not like a wave which is how zerglings/zealots will be clumped up. So, now we've come to these conclusions: A 3 second AOE spell that costs 75 energy will do more damage than a 125 energy spell that has a higher cost to cast it/build. It will also be more likely fatal units who don't move. A Raven can only cast a HSM and one other spell (after waiting for 125-150 energy from spawn). A templar can cast 2 storms and one feedback, then merge from more safe distances assuming he's not alone. (Generally, merging is unsafe but provides a damage soaker if combat is initiated). As I said before, I would love to Ape someone who's using HSM's well, but their cost to potential ratio is extremely sad. Just a random note: That sudden burst of speed is at very close range. Like, 1. You're given 6 in game seconds if you're running to do some form of reaction, which is far more than you get from a storm (You instantly react, or take 50-100% damage). You argue in a strange fashion how good HSM is by pointing out how weak it is. I'm not trying to say HSM is as good as Psi-Storm, what I'm saying that comparatively, it is not that worse. The spells shouldn't be equivalent. Psi-Storm SHOULD be stronger than HSM because of how reliant Protoss are on it. Psi-Storm, just like Fungal are two of the strongest spells in the game, so much so that Protoss and Zerg really can't function in the late game without them. But Terran DOES NOT NEED a Fungal or a Psi-Storm, they are completely capable of making it into the late game without the need of a strong spell. If HSM was as strong as either of those two spells then Terran would undoubtedly be _overpowered_. But HSM isn't significantly worse, just looking at its limitations, stats, damage and other uses of a Raven, HSM is a _GOOD_ spell. There are situations that HSM is going to be stronger than Psi-Storm, very common situations. The random speed is within _2 range_, not 1. Not that the Spell should somehow guarantee 100% AOE if it is casted, that is absurd. Ofcourse people have time to split units at max distance and are retreating, if they couldn't then the spell would be ridiculous, but there _are_ going to be situations where people just won't have the time to split i.e Speedlots/Lings/Banes charging in
HSM is bad enough that in almost any other situation, spending the energy into another spell and money into another unit (Siege Tank!) is more valuable.
The only situation HSM is amazing is a large number of mass grouped units in a tiny tiny area that are otherwise engaged. Chain Fungal or a single storm from a safe range against this is just almost as potent, per energy cost, or more potent. It would be amazing to cast 2 HSM's after a vortex before they were made invincible, although the friendly fire may nerf even that. On that note, why don't archons have FF as well in my list of murmerings.
Keeping a spell so useless that it will only be used in 1 very specific situation is not.... very good. Who knows, 3 years from now with the change (or even the change reverted) people will have discovered many more uses. Just right now, your hypothesis about it being a GOOD spell implies it would be used and invested in. It isn't for a GOOD reason. It's not a GOOD spell. Making it GOOD without overpowering it isn't easy, but right now, it's clearly on the threshhold of "BAD".
|
yeeeeei another nerf for terran...i dont know what the heck is blizz thinking, nerfing terran until is a piece of crap=S
|
On August 26 2011 08:46 sephius wrote:
God, as a Terran player I've never been so happy with a patch. The BFH change is welcome with open arms. It was so cheap, so easy to mass up and so easy to use that I genuinely felt the unit was lowering the skillcap of Terran gameplay. No longer will games be gimmicky and volatile, finally we'll see interesting strategic games again and I can stop blaming every win on the BFH.
For those that cling onto the Hellion, you're ignorant if you think it's the end of the Hellions line. It will still be used, no doubt. It's just at a point now where it's not essential to get, which is what it was for TvT.
I feel the imbalance of most terran openers in general gimmicky not to say pvp isn't gimmicky because it needs to evolve out of its 4gate/blink stalker all in fuckfest. But delaying rax aggressive openings helps some people.
Also about time hellions way tooo cheap for what they do. but the same can be said about the marine.
|
On August 26 2011 11:14 TOSSnPiNaTaS wrote:
yeeeeei another nerf for terran...i dont know what the heck is blizz thinking, nerfing terran until is a piece of crap=S
Yes because they are obviously close to being a piece of crap atm while dominating pretty much everything?
|
On August 26 2011 07:30 moregamethanSEGA wrote:
OH BTW, the counter to seeker missle - BURRRRRRROW.
nuff said, ravens suck, please stop trying to argue otherwise, its a waste of forum space. seeker missle needs to cost less energy. only then will people start upgrading/using it.
Are you being serious with burrow? You do know that Ravens are detectors right? The missles are a lot faster and it will involve more micro in big battle to pick those things off first. I feel like this is a good change.
|
raven honestly seems op now, if the terran can get a decent number of ravens. they so strong late game. a couple seeker missiles on a toss deathball and it kills a bunch of sentries zealots and even stuff like collosi 
|
raven is the new infestor ^-^
|
On August 26 2011 11:25 david.oh.k wrote:raven honestly seems op now, if the terran can get a decent number of ravens. they so strong late game. a couple seeker missiles on a toss deathball and it kills a bunch of sentries zealots and even stuff like collosi and also, was neural always 15 seconds? because now it is. forgot in patch notes i guess?
I'm pretty sure it was. Back in Beta is was permanent as long it was in range of the infestor or until the infestor died.
I thought it was 12 seconds though, but 15 is probably right.
|
I'm really, really worried about that 55 second ultra build speed. I forsee an almost unstoppable techswitch for a race that already has the fastest techswitches in the game. It also still doesn't address the fact that ultras are so big that they're basically useless anyways if they get sniffed out
wtf, why was the barracks nerfed? That will do nothing for the 1/1/1
Blueflame nerf. wtf? Perfect example of screaming, whining children getting their way. So sick and tired of QQing kids forcing blizzard to break the metagame every patch. I can't really justify spending 150/150 anymore on that. blueflame wasn't broken. In the slightest. It was, as many pros, non terrans included, have said, a wonderful piece of instability that made the game more exciting to play and watch.
HSM is still going to be awful. it still can't even come close to keeping up with mutalisks, the cast range is about four inches while the raven remains incredibly slow and vulnerable.
Yet again, terrans in the lower divisions are getting their teeth smashed in just a little bit more.
|
On August 26 2011 11:30 Honeybadger wrote:
I'm really, really worried about that 55 second ultra build speed. I forsee an almost unstoppable techswitch for a race that already has the fastest techswitches in the game. It also still doesn't address the fact that ultras are so big that they're basically useless anyways if they get sniffed out
Ultras were so slow to build that it was nearly pointless before. they may seem big and scary but for how hard it is from them to get an actual damage output they took waaaayy too long to build to be a solid late game unit.
|
The best change is the drone balance fix. Drones can now attack like SCVs and Probes! Finally!!!!!!!
|
On August 26 2011 11:07 Fuzzmosis wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2011 10:33 Dommk wrote:On August 26 2011 10:00 Fuzzmosis wrote:On August 26 2011 09:22 Dommk wrote:On August 26 2011 07:59 Fuzzmosis wrote:On August 26 2011 07:50 Dommk wrote:On August 26 2011 07:43 Fuzzmosis wrote:On August 26 2011 07:35 Dommk wrote:Cast 2 storms on a group of 21 hold position zealots (In shockinlyg perfect formation for this situation) and you kill 21 zealots for 150 energy over 8 seconds.
Cast 2 Seeker Missles on 21 hold position zealots (also, in startlingly tight and perfect formation) and you kill 5 (And leave 8 undamaged) for 250 energy (and in about 1 second unless you cast right over top the unit, which means friendly fire will nuke a Raven)
How did you work this out 0o? I can't find the damage calculations for Seeker as the unit is further away from the centre of the explosion. And by 8 Zealots being undamaged, you mean they only took shield damage correct? But now lets make a comparison, 2 Storms on a group of Zealots running away and you won't scratch them, 2 Seekers on a group of Zealots running away and you still have the same result. 8 seconds is a really LONG time That came from a day when I 2xHSM'ed an attacking Zealot army that was mobile and did around 400 damage, then decided to go to Yee olde Unite Testere (With Extra E's!) And test just how much damage HSM did. It wasn't pretty. Actually, going off memory, I think I couldn't hit 2 zealots with the storms, so only 19 died. My apologies on that. I actually mean that it didn't do any damage at all. Baneling explosion without fall off has a larger damage range than HSM even at it's 25 damage range. Also, you're wrong. 2 Storms on a group of zealots running away and you'll do maybe 40 shield damage to all of them (Kinda similar to what 2 Emps would do). 2 HSM's on a group of zealots running away and you'll do 0 damage because HSM needs to be cast only when someone isn't paying attention or is moving towards you (And because of friendly fire, is very dangerous to cast a HSM on a 150 hp zealot charging towards 6 55 hp marines. It's pretty awkward to need to kite your own spell) I don't understand how it can do 0 damage when the Spell has a 33% greater AOE than Psi-Storm. If Psi-Storm can hit 19 Zealots, then Seeker should be able to hit 25 Seeker Missile is almost 0.25 Speed faster than a Chargelot (0.75 faster than a regular one). If you Seeker Missile a Zealot in the middle of the pack, there is almost no chance it can be micro'd away. But for all intensive purposes, if it can be hit by Storm then it can be hit by Seeker Missile. But different Spells are different. Psi-Storm can only ever do 20DPS per 1.5radious AOE. Multiple Seekers on the other hand can be chained, which makes the spell significantly stronger when the Raven number increases So... let's see here. I cast a missile that is 9 distance away from an already retreating zealot, moving .75 speed faster. You're saying that in 12 seconds, the zealots cannot be scattered. I'm worried about your opinion of protoss players. Again, if they are charging or not retreating, different story, but this is your example. (IF they have charge, if they are retreating, they can't even be hit if durable materials DOUBLED the length because the missile craps out) For the damage range, I have no idea why. I did the test in a unit tester. Maybe the map maker modified the HSM in that case, but storm was more effective than HSM period for less energy. Even 1 cast. You're free to clump up high HP units (And low HP units) and give it your own test. You may come back and say "Fuzzy, you screwed up, clearly you did it wrong" or "Huh. That's stupid". Either or, but please do try it since your other explanations have worried me. Oh cool, so you start talking shots at me as well. Guess I see where this is going. First part is obviously wrong, which is worrying when a Terran player doesn't even know the cast range of their own spells nor the mechanics... Second part, it makes no sense what so ever that in YOUR example there were MORE Zealots that took NO damage from HS than with Psi Storm. Hunter Seeker has a _33%_ greater AOE. So all it means is your tests were incredibly faulty when something basic as a spell with greater AOE hitting less units standing still than a Spell with smaller AOE. I really can't take your "Tests" very seriously at all, sorry NInja Edit, like you!
Yes, Psi Storm does have the potential to hit your own zealots. Not going to even try to deny that. But being a cheap, instant cast that can be produced easier than a Raven (Less Gas, less wait, 5 second summon) that does more damage over an area (You keep calling that into question, I keep telling you to test) doing friendly fire or a suicide attack is better than a detector with other useful spells suiciding because of a terrible, terrible spell. In addition, you need to march your own units into the spell. HSM can be led into your own units (Assuming amazing Micro, or amazing luck). I'm sorry, you may act like I'm being snide by disregarding your "Tests", but they ARE faulty. I mean, a spell with 1.5 AOE hits more units than a spell with 2.0 AOE. I can't understand how when something as basic as that is wrong that you wouldn't somehow think you fucked up your tests in one way or another. High Tempalrs put a 45second cooldown on warpgates. Protoss does have flexibility with warpgate units, but you just can't create whatever you want whenever you want, you have to juggle cooldowns to create a proper balanced army. A raven costs 50/50 more than a Templar, but the benefits? It provides Detection, most almost twice as fast, it can fly AND has other spells which can greatly benefit the Terran army. Obviously due to the convenience of Tech labs and such compared to Warpgates, a Protoss WILL have more Templars in their army, but there is nothing wrong with that. Different races will have different units, but at least damage wise, Seeker Missile has the same energy efficiency as a 3second Storm which is pretty goddamn good if you consider that all its damage is BURST as opposed to a 20dps AOE--you would except something that does it's damage over a longer period of time with a smaller AOE in a static location would be more efficient if a unit stands in it for the full duration. A Hunter Seeker could be lead into your army, but the only Melee unit Terran actually has is an SCV--good luck trying to lead Seeker Missile into ranged Units that move faster than it and have soo much DPS that they can almost instantly snipe whatever that unit is Guess what I did? I tested. You are correct, and the raven does have a larger splash radius. For instance, If a group of 35 zerglings are clumped up, 22 will survive but all take damage, whereas for a storm, 16 will survive but not take any damage (Unless they, you know, run through the storm, seeing as they only lasted 2 seconds). I apologize for that inconsistancy, you are entirely correct that the range is larger. I suppose I remembered wrong. Now, try it out for yourself. Do it. (Note, clumped up means a perfect circle, not like a wave which is how zerglings/zealots will be clumped up. So, now we've come to these conclusions: A 3 second AOE spell that costs 75 energy will do more damage than a 125 energy spell that has a higher cost to cast it/build. It will also be more likely fatal units who don't move. A Raven can only cast a HSM and one other spell (after waiting for 125-150 energy from spawn). A templar can cast 2 storms and one feedback, then merge from more safe distances assuming he's not alone. (Generally, merging is unsafe but provides a damage soaker if combat is initiated). As I said before, I would love to Ape someone who's using HSM's well, but their cost to potential ratio is extremely sad. Just a random note: That sudden burst of speed is at very close range. Like, 1. You're given 6 in game seconds if you're running to do some form of reaction, which is far more than you get from a storm (You instantly react, or take 50-100% damage). You argue in a strange fashion how good HSM is by pointing out how weak it is. I'm not trying to say HSM is as good as Psi-Storm, what I'm saying that comparatively, it is not that worse. The spells shouldn't be equivalent. Psi-Storm SHOULD be stronger than HSM because of how reliant Protoss are on it. Psi-Storm, just like Fungal are two of the strongest spells in the game, so much so that Protoss and Zerg really can't function in the late game without them. But Terran DOES NOT NEED a Fungal or a Psi-Storm, they are completely capable of making it into the late game without the need of a strong spell. If HSM was as strong as either of those two spells then Terran would undoubtedly be _overpowered_. But HSM isn't significantly worse, just looking at its limitations, stats, damage and other uses of a Raven, HSM is a _GOOD_ spell. There are situations that HSM is going to be stronger than Psi-Storm, very common situations. The random speed is within _2 range_, not 1. Not that the Spell should somehow guarantee 100% AOE if it is casted, that is absurd. Ofcourse people have time to split units at max distance and are retreating, if they couldn't then the spell would be ridiculous, but there _are_ going to be situations where people just won't have the time to split i.e Speedlots/Lings/Banes charging in HSM is bad enough that in almost any other situation, spending the energy into another spell and money into another unit (Siege Tank!) is more valuable. The only situation HSM is amazing is a large number of mass grouped units in a tiny tiny area that are otherwise engaged. Chain Fungal or a single storm from a safe range against this is just almost as potent, per energy cost, or more potent. It would be amazing to cast 2 HSM's after a vortex before they were made invincible, although the friendly fire may nerf even that. On that note, why don't archons have FF as well in my list of murmerings. Keeping a spell so useless that it will only be used in 1 very specific situation is not.... very good. Who knows, 3 years from now with the change (or even the change reverted) people will have discovered many more uses. Just right now, your hypothesis about it being a GOOD spell implies it would be used and invested in. It isn't for a GOOD reason. It's not a GOOD spell. Making it GOOD without overpowering it isn't easy, but right now, it's clearly on the threshhold of "BAD".
This is so ridiculous. You are just saying the spell is bad for the sake of it. Did you even read your own interpretation of of "The only situation HSM is amazing is"?
You act like units being grouped up in a 2 radious AOE happens once a blue moon in Starcraft.
Either way, HSM shouldn't be soo good that the sole reason you get a Raven is because of it. If that is the case then clearly you know the spell is broken as Terran certainly doesn't need a Storm/Fungal equivalent. Ravens play a much higher fuction in the Terran army as opposed to a Templar or a Infestor, they are like swiss army knifes, if its spells weren't all situational then it would be a stupid unit considering how much it already does.
It takes a long time for people to incorporate new things into their already Standard play, but just because it isn't being used doesn't mean it is bad, it might mean it takes more effort.
Bust damage is one of the hardest things to balance, especially if it is AOE and ESPECIALLY if it is attached to a spell where it can be casted multiple times in a single area. (Triple especially when you also consider the Terran is the race which has the highest DPS army in the game--which cannot be dealt with without AOE)
There are only two things in this game that does higher burst damage than a HSM. First being a Nuke and the second being the Yamato cannon. Hunter Seeker can't be a convenient spell to use. If the Spell were to be made 75 energy then to compensate HSM would most likely have to be made to be pathetically weak.
The high energy cost is obviously due to balance reasons, think how stupid it would be if a Raven could cast Two Seeker missiles in a row, you could get into situations where you can instantly gib units in AOE.
|
I agree that the blue flame nerf was unnecessary. It's also way too soon to make a call on patching as they only really seemed to become super popular after the SlayerS show in Anaheim, furthermore, roaches, spines and queens are more than capable of holding them off considering the terrans investment to get fast blueflame. TvT they both have the option so must be balanced and TvP... are they even used???
|
So now every1 APM will decrease greatly cuz spaming wont be counted as APM annymore. I guess it makes sense 
It would be cool to see the pros real APM without that spaming
|
Wow my APM on PTR is like... 90 T_T. lol.
|
On August 26 2011 11:56 QTIP. wrote:
Wow my APM on PTR is like... 90 T_T. lol.
You shouldn't be so worried about it. It is not like after the patch hits you go from touch typing to just typing with your index finger
You will be playing as fast (or slow) as you were before, all that has changed is the number
|
On August 26 2011 11:58 Dommk wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2011 11:56 QTIP. wrote:
Wow my APM on PTR is like... 90 T_T. lol. You shouldn't be so worried about it. It is not like after the patch hits you go from touch typing to just typing with your index finger You will be playing as fast (or slow) as you were before, all that has changed is the number
Haha yeah i know ... It's just a bit shocking to see lol :S
|
I surprised people aren't more mad about APM nerf 
|
50/50 cost to scout? thank you blizz.
The reason why contaminant cost too much is specifically for ZVZ matchups. By lowering the cost of overseers, zergs with LAIR can abuse making alot of overseers and contaminanting the opposition zerg's hatcheries constantly, causing no injects for a very very long time. So increasing the mana cost would rectify this problem/abuse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
