EPTHow can people generate proper feedback with those 2 units in their current state...
LotV Balance Update Now Live (April 15) - Page 5
| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
How can people generate proper feedback with those 2 units in their current state... | ||
|
Aveng3r
United States2411 Posts
On April 15 2015 07:20 sd_andeh wrote: Please disable comments for threads like these. Such a shitload of people whining about stuff when they don't even have or play the beta. Noone who doesn't play the beta should be allowed to comment, as they have no idea. Someone said the OP was painful to read. I say the posts of random whiners is painful to read. I think what matters most is that Blizzard recieves enough feedback from the professional players, and never ever reads threads like these. I'd also like to add that one thing I do agree with is that Blizzard shouldn't focus too much on designing units used for specific things, I prefer it when the players figure things like that out themselves. pretty close minded statement right there, exactly what would disabling comments accomplish? | ||
|
Mistakes
United States1102 Posts
| ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
On April 15 2015 07:06 BakedButters wrote: I wish Blizzard just implement double harvest right now They won't, because it would add alot of complexity to the game and the only way to make up for that is to reduce the game speed. Pros can't even handle HotS macro and do some cute micro in the meantime, because they get overwhelmed. What will happen if players actually have to scout what the opponents economy is doing or if they actually have to react to what the opponents eco is looking like. Only thing a more complex economy will lead to is more one sided games and a worse viewer experience, because fights will look even more a-move then in HotS. Don't get me wrong I am all for more complexity. But you have to keep in mind that humans will have to be able to play the game and look good while doing it. No one wants to play a game were even the best look like a noob. And sadly everyone is all into playing Starcraft on fastest  . | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On April 15 2015 07:44 Mistakes wrote: Many many many many people have been watching streams religiously if they didn't get a beta invite. Their input is just as valid, if only for the spectator experience. It's not even that, some of it is just math that we expect first graders to be able of. | ||
|
imJealous
United States1382 Posts
On April 15 2015 06:17 Hider wrote: Incorrect. They beat Maurauders (esp with recent buff)., not Marines. Hence, why the Adept is in the game. When mixed with Guardian Shield and Zealots to tank, the situation further favors protoss. The issue is however twofold: (1) Immortals too slow and easily get outdropped and has no countermicro vs Concussive Shell). (2) Your produce too slowly which mean that in reality your army will consist more of Stalkers, which doesn't do a whole lot vs bio. Solution to midgame protoss - Reduce Robo cost to 100/75 - Increase movement speed of Immortals to 2.75 and remove damage point. - Remove shield from Immortals (lame design) - Increase range to 7 (hence making them scale better and furhter reward focus fire). - Reduce cost, BT and supply of Immortals - Remove/redesign Concussive Shell. Result --> You don't need AOE anymore. You can now produce a strong and bigger core army vs Roaches and you have Adept vs Marines and Lings + you have better escape mechanic and more countermicro. Problem for protoss right now is that they get behind ecowise and their tech/infastructure costs are also pretty high, which makes them rely on AOE. However, reducing infastructure costs and boosting the mobility of the Immortal can fix that. Agree with this post! The immortal is much weaker now due to the fact that it can be killed. That's fine, the main reason players use them is for their strong damage against armored units anyway. Rather than trying to reinforce the fiction behind the unit (they are 'immortal' hur hur!) they could look to reduce their cost and/or build time proportionately so they can be a more core unit. Would help reduce the risk of going for immortal drops as well. | ||
|
boxerfred
Germany8360 Posts
On April 15 2015 05:36 Teoita wrote: Lurker change is pointless. Cyclones are still dumb. Adepts are still worthless. I dont know how the fuck they decided to change the Tempest of all things since Protoss cant survive to late game anyway Not listening to feedback is a virtue that was always very important to the Blizzsters | ||
|
Afterhours
United States125 Posts
On April 15 2015 06:17 Hider wrote: Solution to midgame protoss - Reduce Robo cost to 100/75 - Increase movement speed of Immortals to 2.75 and remove damage point. - Remove shield from Immortals (lame design) - Increase range to 7 (hence making them scale better and furhter reward focus fire). - Reduce cost, BT and supply of Immortals - Remove/redesign Concussive Shell. Result --> You don't need AOE anymore. You can now produce a strong and bigger core army vs Roaches and you have Adept vs Marines and Lings + you have better escape mechanic and more countermicro. To make your point viable, you have suggested 6 different balance changes just to make Immortal's a massable unit instead of thinking of ways to make Storm/AoE more available. - With the Robo change, that just makes the Warp Prism/Disruptor available much sooner. So at least 1 form of AoE is more accessible now. - Increased MS directly counters the usefulness of concussive shells slow, to mention their usefulness in drop harass. - Removed Shield because you think it's lame. Okay...? Any alternatives? Or is Immortal just a boring a-move unit now? - Range 7 - Sure? - Reduced cost,BT,supply - With the Robo Change, now Immortals will absolutely decimate Roaches/Ravagers/Hard-counter Marauders. What a timing push. - Remove/Redesign Conc. Shell. Any Alternatives? Pretty drastic amount of changes just to say that Protoss doesn't need AoE despite the race being built to have less numbers in an army compared to the other 2 races. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9403 Posts
To make your point viable, you have suggested 6 different balance changes just to make Immortal's a massable unit instead of thinking of ways to make Storm/AoE more available. I responded to a comment about protoss AOE not being viable and not enough changes being made, and hence provided a solution that wasn't focussed on AOE and has multiple other advantages. But it is true that to get a solid gameplay with protoss, multiple changes must be made to the race. There is no easy 1 change to protoss that fixes everything. Reduced cost,BT,supply - With the Robo Change, now Immortals will absolutely decimate Roaches/Ravagers/Hard-counter Marauders. What a timing push. Incorrect. They will be cost efficiently but the thing your missing - and why its so important that toss gets less reliant on warptech - is that Immortals come from a standard production facility. If the majority of the army strenght cannot be warped in, and you instead have 2 Robos in the midgame (and fewer warpgates), you will have an easier time defending and moving out on the map, but your overall timing attack will be less strong. Remove/Redesign Conc. Shell. Any Alternatives? It removes micro. Awfullly designed passive. With the Robo change, that just makes the Warp Prism/Disruptor available much sooner. So at least 1 form of AoE is more accessible now. Reduce tier 2 cost while at the same time increasing tier 3 cost (if thats a neccesity). Removed Shield because you think it's lame. Okay...? Any alternatives? Or is Immortal just a boring a-move unit now? Actually the Immortal in LOTV is an amove unit!!! Pressing a button =/ micro --> Pressing T to stim bio units isn't micro. Micro mainly comes from how you move your units, hence why the movement speed buff, range buff and damage point removal. This Immortal has a ton more micro potential than the LOTV-version. - Increased MS directly counters the usefulness of concussive shells slow, to mention their usefulness in drop harass. I don't see your point. Concussive Shell does 50% damage reduction and 1.35 movement speed Immortals are still unmicroable. | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany15981 Posts
On April 15 2015 05:51 404AlphaSquad wrote: Tldr: Balance update: -we want to force our ideas no matter how terrible they might be. -we removed interesting unit interactions. -we still wont try eco changes. perfect summary of those balance update | ||
|
Ramiz1989
12124 Posts
On April 15 2015 06:43 -Kyo- wrote: Many have already happened. Some including premier teams and players for hundreds++ of dollars. We all get that they are just for fun, but it is kind of depressing when you are a person participating in the beta and have literally no chance at playing in any of them simply due to race. @_@;; And those are just fan-made tournaments that aren't organized nor supported by Blizzard, and their whole point was to give bigger sample of games to Blizzard. The guys that organized those tourneys and that have spent money on them understood quite well what they are doing and what is the current state of the game in the beta. All I see is bunch of guys whining how these changes are "worthless" and how Blizzard is "clueless" while on the other hand when you ask 10 players what do they think about beta and what should be changed, all 10 of them will give different answer. Now, I think that Blizzard fucked up many times in the past, but I really appreciate that they aren't hasty about their decisions and listening to the community. | ||
|
StickyFlower
Sweden68 Posts
| ||
|
archonOOid
1983 Posts
Overall, we like the change to warp-in being dependent on position, but maybe we could have specific units that are more resilient to getting picked off quickly. What could they have in mind by this statement? Haven't seen many comments on this matter. The distance might then be based on the spawn location and the zealots looks they will be changed. I still don't get how it will be easier to defend bases as protoss if expansion bases will take longer time to resupply with army units compared to your home base. Looks like this is a change in the wrong direction. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On April 15 2015 08:38 archonOOid wrote: What could they have in mind by this statement? Haven't seen many comments on this matter. The distance might then be based on the spawn location and the zealots looks they will be changed. I still don't get how it will be easier to defend bases as protoss if expansion bases will take longer time to resupply with army units compared to your home base. Looks like this is a change in the wrong direction. They probably are just referring to units taking more damage and thus you cannot warp in your opponents face anymore. | ||
|
KingofdaHipHop
United States25602 Posts
On April 15 2015 08:38 archonOOid wrote: What could they have in mind by this statement? Haven't seen many comments on this matter. The distance might then be based on the spawn location and the zealots looks they will be changed. I still don't get how it will be easier to defend bases as protoss if expansion bases will take longer time to resupply with army units compared to your home base. Looks like this is a change in the wrong direction. they mean where you warp in in relation to the opponents units. You just take more damage while warping in so you can't just warp in right on top of an army anymore, you have to be more careful about it. | ||
|
[UoN]Sentinel
United States11320 Posts
| ||
|
ROOTFayth
Canada3351 Posts
On April 15 2015 08:18 Ramiz1989 wrote: And those are just fan-made tournaments that aren't organized nor supported by Blizzard, and their whole point was to give bigger sample of games to Blizzard. The guys that organized those tourneys and that have spent money on them understood quite well what they are doing and what is the current state of the game in the beta. All I see is bunch of guys whining how these changes are "worthless" and how Blizzard is "clueless" while on the other hand when you ask 10 players what do they think about beta and what should be changed, all 10 of them will give different answer. Now, I think that Blizzard fucked up many times in the past, but I really appreciate that they aren't hasty about their decisions and listening to the community. I think everybody except avilo maybe agrees that cyclone needs a much harder nerf than that | ||
|
-Kyo-
Japan1926 Posts
On April 15 2015 07:41 Aveng3r wrote: pretty close minded statement right there, exactly what would disabling comments accomplish? Well, in general, it is a good idea to keep in mind that the majority of players who post on TL are around gold league and genuinely have very little understanding of balance, meta-game and the like. Though, this is not specific to TL/SC2 so hopefully I don't sound elitist by pointing it out. Nonetheless, it is very rare to see good suggestions in a sea of biased comments. And since I am on the topic I will take a moment to re-emphasize as I have previously that you must maintain a fair approach to ideas that are posted. Make sure that if you are evaluating balance posts or whatever else that you never bend in the face of things like a join date, post count, or reputation. Ideas are ideas. Of course, there may be some fantastic ones that come from people who are in a lower league, and disabling comments would not aid in the process of determining which are or are not; but it is indeed a reasonable position to be skeptical of the large majority of suggestions you see from people on forums regardless of the game. I don't think the poster conveyed this idea but I think it was close enough to give a reply to you for. On April 15 2015 08:59 ROOTFayth wrote: I think everybody except avilo maybe agrees that cyclone needs a much harder nerf than that Thank you for making my job easier. | ||
|
Ramiz1989
12124 Posts
On April 15 2015 08:59 ROOTFayth wrote: I think everybody except avilo maybe agrees that cyclone needs a much harder nerf than that Definitely, this shouldn't be even considered as nerf but I also dislike Tempest's ability a lot(that's probably the stupidest thing in whole LotV right now in my opinion). Stuff need changing, but they are taking slower approach, which is fine by me if Beta is going to last for quite some time like it should. | ||
|
zeratul_jf
United States808 Posts
On April 15 2015 08:59 ROOTFayth wrote: I think everybody except avilo maybe agrees that cyclone needs a much harder nerf than that Aren't ppl always complaning to bring back the OPness of units like in BW? Granted the cyclone doesnt require the micro that a reaver did in BW, but siege where freaking strong back then and they had WAY MORE dmg than current siege tanks... and didnt require a lot of micro. I think that cyclones are pretty damn strong but I'm ok with Blizzard making OP units and then buffing other units to combat the OPness rather than nerfing crap into the ground and making them useless, as we have seen before. | ||
| ||
