EPTMaybe they will finally wake up and understand that the game has a lot of major design flaws at some point?..
Naaaaaah.
Infestor needs a major rework. All of its abilities don't make any sence. They are either too good or just plain useless.
Dustin Browder On the Infestor - Page 17
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
DidYuhim
Ukraine1905 Posts
Maybe they will finally wake up and understand that the game has a lot of major design flaws at some point?.. Naaaaaah. Infestor needs a major rework. All of its abilities don't make any sence. They are either too good or just plain useless. | ||
|
xAdra
Singapore1858 Posts
Now explain this: Sniping 10 broodlords, just once each, would require 20 actions (press snipe hotkey and click on broodlord), and is extremely APM intensive. To fungal 10 marines, you need 2 actions (fungal hotkey+click on clump of marines). The "clicking" portion is FAR easier than clicking on individual broodlords, due to the area-of-effect possessed by fungal growth. How is it that the ghost was seen as "extremely imbalanced" if the rapid sniping was so difficult to pull off as opposed to simply clicking the area and mass of units that were to be fungaled? It really doesn't make sense to me, and is an elephant in the room. | ||
|
Mementoss
Canada2595 Posts
However, keep the infestor to stun air units for dealing with drops, and early air pressure so mid game infestors remaing viable. TLDR; Take away stun from infestors completely. See how that works. Than try a slow. I think a slow is just as bad as a stun because your not gunna be able to micro anyways. EDIT: It might be really cool if fungal growth was an AOE positional control spell. aka, you cast it in an area and it stays on the ground and it slows and damages any units to go on it. This lasts longer if casted on creep. | ||
|
Targe
United Kingdom14103 Posts
On November 08 2012 09:33 Soda wrote: I think infestor control has improved immensely in the last couple mouths. Pros have getting better about not headbutting their infestors into deathballs. That could be part of the reason why they seem imbalanced without a major buff. Going from headbutting infestors into not headbutting infestors isn't the sign of good control, that is a sign of not having bad control. | ||
|
mememolly
4765 Posts
| ||
|
Dragar
United Kingdom971 Posts
If you nerf infestors but leave them better than zerglings and roaches, Zerg still builds infestors en masse and everyone complains at how stupid it is. Maybe zerg wins a little less. If you nerf infestors so they're worse than massing zerglings and roaches, Zerg gets walked over because we know that mass roach is worthless. So what are you going to do? | ||
|
Godwrath
Spain10162 Posts
On November 08 2012 23:11 Mementoss wrote: How bad would it be if infestors didn't stun ground units? Just did damage over time. Cause the damage is pretty impressive. However, this might cause infestors being easily stimed and picked off. Maybe increase the range a tiny bit. But it would cause players to have good positioning with baneling support for infestors to ensure any marines coming forward would be suicide. However, keep the infestor to stun air units for dealing with drops, and early air pressure so mid game infestors remaing viable. TLDR; Take away stun from infestors completely. See how that works. Than try a slow. I think a slow is just as bad as a stun because your not gunna be able to micro anyways. EDIT: It might be really cool if fungal growth was an AOE positional control spell. aka, you cast it in an area and it stays on the ground and it slows and damages any units to go on it. This lasts longer if casted on creep. The damage is impressive on low HP, on the rest of units is just ok, but the root is pretty important for zergs to be able to connect his melee units or hold ground The problem with the infestor is not being overpowered, but being the biggest pillar holding zerg's army. If you nerf it, you need to balance more stuff, and when you balance more stuff, you have to take more match ups into that equation. That's why it's not as simple as "nerf unit A, buff unit B". | ||
|
shadymmj
1906 Posts
On November 08 2012 23:11 Mementoss wrote: How bad would it be if infestors didn't stun ground units? Just did damage over time. Cause the damage is pretty impressive. However, this might cause infestors being easily stimed and picked off. Maybe increase the range a tiny bit. But it would cause players to have good positioning with baneling support for infestors to ensure any marines coming forward would be suicide. However, keep the infestor to stun air units for dealing with drops, and early air pressure so mid game infestors remaing viable. TLDR; Take away stun from infestors completely. See how that works. Than try a slow. I think a slow is just as bad as a stun because your not gunna be able to micro anyways. EDIT: It might be really cool if fungal growth was an AOE positional control spell. aka, you cast it in an area and it stays on the ground and it slows and damages any units to go on it. This lasts longer if casted on creep. you're supposed to use other units as a shield, exactly like what you said for banelings. the game isn't gonna play itself for you. it's like asking in BW - what's stopping tanks from picking off HT? what's stopping mutas from picking off HT? the answer really is brains. | ||
|
Qwerty85
Croatia5536 Posts
Fungal is in my opinion broken spell because, if we assume equal/similar skill levels of players, it is too unforgiving for the opponent. One fungal roots and stops move commands, making every clumping of units fatal mistake. If siege tanks or thors could for example root infestors, banes or mutas and also deal splash damage at the same time, it would be considered extremely overpowered. You fly in thor range with mutas, all mutas dead. You come too close to tanks with infestors, all infestors dead. It would simply be too unforgiving. You could also make similar comparison with ghost/infestor. Ghost was widely used vs zerg because how good it was against almost everything zerg could throw at terran player. Ghosts were made useless in TvZ, they are even unable to counter unit like infestor which they are supposed to counter. Not to mention that infestor usage in every single matchup and vs every single playstyle makes games repetitive and boring to watch. ZvZ is the best example of that argument. It seems like double standards to me. And now when we have 8/9 zergs advancing in next stage of Code S it is pretty obvious that zerg is the race that deals best results in Starcraft 2. Does that make the race imbalanced, you be the judge of that... | ||
|
Eviscerador
Spain286 Posts
On November 08 2012 23:04 SinCitta wrote: The irony is that Blizzard wanted to make fungal not target air units, be a slow projectile and not root blink stalker (not all at once but they tried each of them individually) before/with the DPS buff. The community rejected all of them and now fungal simply has none of these weaknesses. Now the community demands changes but Blizzard is unwilling to for whatever reason. The changes were discarded because they broke the ZvX mu, making ZvZ a muta fest coinflip, The ZvT a joke thanks to stim, and the PvZ was just 8 gate +2 blink all in. The infestor is not the problem. The lack of any other viable unit in the mid game which transition into late game, and the impossibility of winning the protoss void ray / collosus death ball without the current FG, is the problem. Fix that, and I will be happy to NOT make infestors all the time because I'M FORCED to do so. | ||
|
Fr0d0
Belize37 Posts
On November 08 2012 23:30 Qwerty85 wrote: It is pretty obvious that infestor is too versatile unit. It deals against any playstyle well, it doesn't require zerg to react by scouting because it is useful (in TvZ for example) against pure bio, marine-tank, mech playstyles, even late game terran vs zerg deathball style. Fungal is in my opinion broken spell because, if we assume equal/similar skill levels of players, it is too unforgiving for the opponent. One fungal roots and stops move commands, making every clumping of units fatal mistake. If siege tanks or thors could for example root infestors, banes or mutas and also deal splash damage at the same time, it would be considered extremely overpowered. You fly in thor range with mutas, all mutas dead. You come too close to tanks with infestors, all infestors dead. It would simply be too unforgiving. You could also make similar comparison with ghost/infestor. Ghost was widely used vs zerg because how good it was against almost everything zerg could throw at terran player. Ghosts were made useless in TvZ, they are even unable to counter unit like infestor which they are supposed to counter. Not to mention that infestor usage in every single matchup and vs every single playstyle makes games repetitive and boring to watch. ZvZ is the best example of that argument. It seems like double standards to me. And now when we have 8/9 zergs advancing in next stage of Code S it is pretty obvious that zerg is the race that deals best results in Starcraft 2. Does that make the race imbalanced, you be the judge of that... >60% of terrans in GSL Ro4 for 2 years - balance, terrans just are better players. 50% of zergs in Ro16 for 1 round - endless whine. Freaking retards... User was warned for this post | ||
|
Mementoss
Canada2595 Posts
On November 08 2012 23:21 shadymmj wrote: you're supposed to use other units as a shield, exactly like what you said for banelings. the game isn't gonna play itself for you. it's like asking in BW - what's stopping tanks from picking off HT? what's stopping mutas from picking off HT? the answer really is brains. Thats my point, the damage is already really good. So it would be more exciting if more risk was involved. Aka, units aren't rooted. Cause really, moving 50% slower means, you aren't going to be doing any micro worth while anyways. The only thing this would be relevant for would be chargelots not getting 100% shut down by fungal. The more I think about it. The more I kinda like the idea of making it a positional AOE spell placed on terrain. But I doubt that would ever happen. | ||
|
Mementoss
Canada2595 Posts
On November 08 2012 23:40 Fr0d0 wrote: >60% of terrans in GSL Ro4 for 2 years - balance, terrans just are better players. 50% of zergs in Ro16 for 1 round - endless whine. Freaking retards... You are 100% missing the point. The point is, can you name 1 situation late game where proper use of infestors wouldn't win? They have spells that are good at every point adn situation. Rather than requiring players to chose what units to build and having different ways to use them. | ||
|
Eviscerador
Spain286 Posts
On November 08 2012 23:42 Mementoss wrote: You are 100% missing the point. The point is, can you name 1 situation late game where proper use of infestors wouldn't win? They have spells that are good at every point adn situation. Rather than requiring players to chose what units to build and having different ways to use them. I will ask you the same, but in other way. Can you name 1 situation late game where not having infestors can win the game to the zerg? | ||
|
Tuczniak
1561 Posts
On November 08 2012 23:11 xAdra wrote: Though sc2 is apm intensive. It's not a game about who can click 20 times faster with a group of units. It would be the same thing if fungal costed 1/3 energy, did 1/3 dmg and lasted 1/3 of time, but the damage would be instant. You would have to click 3x faster, but you could evaporate all <150hp units immediately. What I don't understand is this: People have said the ghost snipe era displayed massive imbalance in terran's favour, fair enough. The common explanation is that with ghost snipes, a terran can essentially vaporize a zerg's entire T3 army within the span of seconds. Now explain this: Sniping 10 broodlords, just once each, would require 20 actions (press snipe hotkey and click on broodlord), and is extremely APM intensive. To fungal 10 marines, you need 2 actions (fungal hotkey+click on clump of marines). The "clicking" portion is FAR easier than clicking on individual broodlords, due to the area-of-effect possessed by fungal growth. How is it that the ghost was seen as "extremely imbalanced" if the rapid sniping was so difficult to pull off as opposed to simply clicking the area and mass of units that were to be fungaled? It really doesn't make sense to me, and is an elephant in the room. | ||
|
vthree
Hong Kong8039 Posts
On November 08 2012 23:40 Fr0d0 wrote: >60% of terrans in GSL Ro4 for 2 years - balance, terrans just are better players. 50% of zergs in Ro16 for 1 round - endless whine. Freaking retards... Yes, and no one ever whine about Terran and Blizzard never nerfed Terran or buffed the other races? Freaking retard. | ||
|
S_SienZ
1878 Posts
On November 08 2012 23:46 Tuczniak wrote: Though sc2 is apm intensive. It's not a game about who can click 20 times faster with a group of units. Not true. Unless it's at the highest level where the faster player is mostly needlessly spamming, a player playing 20x faster than his opponent will win every single time. | ||
|
vthree
Hong Kong8039 Posts
On November 08 2012 23:44 Eviscerador wrote: I will ask you the same, but in other way. Can you name 1 situation late game where not having infestors can win the game to the zerg? Most people are not asking for a straight removal of the infestor or fungal. We would just like to make it less effective. Amulet was nerfed for HTs and people still build them. Bunkers and rax were nerfed and they are still used. | ||
|
S_SienZ
1878 Posts
On November 08 2012 23:44 Eviscerador wrote: I will ask you the same, but in other way. Can you name 1 situation late game where not having infestors can win the game to the zerg? You do realise it's possible to buff other units to make up for that if it really is the case right? What's the ideal balanced state of Zerg we don't know for sure yet, but it sure has hell is NOT balanced as it is. | ||
|
Tuczniak
1561 Posts
On November 08 2012 23:52 S_SienZ wrote: I meant "who can click 20 times in shorter time". It's obvious that talking about match with players with 10apm and 200apm is pointlessNot true. Unless it's at the highest level where the faster player is mostly needlessly spamming, a player playing 20x faster than his opponent will win every single time. | ||
| ||
