|
On May 12 2015 12:13 Beelzebub1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2015 12:08 FabledIntegral wrote:
Lurker change is stupid. The problem is the range, nothing else, unless you consider extreme alterations. Oh heey <3 edit: True, this might help though, I think more nerfs are on the table for the Lurker, not sure if they are going to mess with the range right away but I can definitely see a hp nerf.
But man now they are weaker against light, hard counters are the way to go, such fun!! /s
The longer the beta goes the more it seems its going to be hard counter central
|
On May 12 2015 12:23 Lexender wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2015 12:13 Beelzebub1 wrote:On May 12 2015 12:08 FabledIntegral wrote:
Lurker change is stupid. The problem is the range, nothing else, unless you consider extreme alterations. Oh heey <3 edit: True, this might help though, I think more nerfs are on the table for the Lurker, not sure if they are going to mess with the range right away but I can definitely see a hp nerf. But man now they are weaker against light, hard counters are the way to go, such fun!! /s The longer the beta goes the more it seems its going to be hard counter central
Idk, from what I'm seeing this should just make them slightly less broken vs. bio at least, yea they are weaker against light but from where they were that's a good thing lol
|
On May 12 2015 12:25 Beelzebub1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2015 12:23 Lexender wrote:On May 12 2015 12:13 Beelzebub1 wrote:On May 12 2015 12:08 FabledIntegral wrote:
Lurker change is stupid. The problem is the range, nothing else, unless you consider extreme alterations. Oh heey <3 edit: True, this might help though, I think more nerfs are on the table for the Lurker, not sure if they are going to mess with the range right away but I can definitely see a hp nerf. But man now they are weaker against light, hard counters are the way to go, such fun!! /s The longer the beta goes the more it seems its going to be hard counter central Idk, from what I'm seeing this should just make them slightly less broken vs. bio at least, yea they are weaker against light but from where they were that's a good thing lol
Its actually funny tho, zerg is the race with the least +bonus damage of all races, so its not like all this counter mechanic is that necesary.
Its not a bad change it won,t make as much a diference, 20 damage with 9 range and splash is still really good vs light units. But still needs more changes.
Also no talk about the ultra yet, I wonder if they actually plan to carry out the 8 armor ultra.
|
The lack of economy changes (or even mention of economy changes) is really disappointing. It feels like Blizzard has made up it's mind on the current 100/60 model, which after playing the LotV beta I really don't like.
I have to admit, all of the changes so far are making me like the direction of LotV less and less. I'll undoubtably buy it for the campaign and to try it out for awhile, but at this rate rather than the revolution SC2 needs LotV is looking to be the final nail in it's coffin.
|
A few more patches to go and everything in this game will have the speed of zerglings on creep and/or tempest range. 'cause clearly, making everything go faster and shoot further is the solution to everything.
|
I think it's a little early to get too passionate about the changes, it's just one more experiment.
Still, I'm disappointed with their work on Protoss, in terms of general design. But maybe it's just an old BW player talking.
I personally don't like the core and the mothership, they feel like band-aid units for design issues, and I don't like the fact they just keep adding activated ability after activated ability (or spells) to all protoss units. They're just turning them into a "click at the right time blah blah or die".
And of course, instead of working on addressing any of those issues, or tweaking units like the immortals without the usual "let's add an activated ability" solution, they're spending more time designing a new unit for terrans, which balance aside is the most complete race by far.
oh well, we'll see what happens.
|
Only change I don't like is the mothership core one.
|
On May 12 2015 11:50 Parcelleus wrote:Show nested quote +Upgraded Zealot speed increased from 2.75 to 2.953
With the addition of the Adept, the Zealots role has been reduced in the later stages game. To adjust for this, we decided to make a mid/late game buff to Zealots that makes the Zealots be a more ideal choice in certain situations compared to the Adept. Alternatively, we could have toned down the effectiveness of the Adept, but overall we agree with the community opinion that Protoss isn’t as powerful as the other two races currently, so we felt this change was best. Well by mid-late game Protoss usually has charge, so this change with their reasoning makes no sense. Charge is better for mid-late game than using this minor speed buff. Furthermore, this small speed buff makes no difference to someone who has good kiting. Idea for you Blizz (free of charge this 1): Buff warpgate units and nerf warp-gate (both must happen together). I think you have heard from the community that we rather micro units (gateway units) , than rely on MSC or recall.
I was under the impression that the speed buff was part of charge (as charge increases base movement speed already). But either way, it's in addition to charge. You're acting as if it's either/or.
It literally makes your army faster if its composed of zealots. How anyone could think a small speed buff to a basic unit "makes no difference" is beyond me. It's a serious buff to gateway units and you just dismissed it out of hand.
|
I don't really like any of this.
The zealot speed change is only good if they remove charge I think, but then they should probably go up to 3.25 or 3.375.
Lurkers, I don't know about that, lurkers typically 2 shot marines in SC and in SC2 you want them to take three now?
I don't like where all this is going.
Brood Lord change seems good, I'll say that. Now improve the speed from 1.40625 to either 1.875 like BCs and Carriers or maybe 1.6875 to go a good 60% of the way.
|
On May 12 2015 13:15 Fuchsteufelswild wrote:
I don't really like any of this.
The zealot speed change is only good if they remove charge I think, but then they should probably go up to 3.25 or 3.375.
Lurkers, I don't know about that, lurkers typically 2 shot marines in SC and in SC2 you want them to take three now?
I don't like where all this is going.
Brood Lord change seems good, I'll say that. Now improve the speed from 1.40625 to either 1.875 like BCs and Carriers or maybe 1.6875 to go a good 60% of the way.
lol. Your post reeks of Zerg bias. Lurkers already shred marines, taking 3 hits will hardly make a difference, Z is already the strong race in the beta.
|
All the changes do look weird.
I hope to see more games to see how it all comes together.
|
|
|
On May 12 2015 13:21 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2015 13:15 Fuchsteufelswild wrote:
I don't really like any of this.
The zealot speed change is only good if they remove charge I think, but then they should probably go up to 3.25 or 3.375.
Lurkers, I don't know about that, lurkers typically 2 shot marines in SC and in SC2 you want them to take three now?
I don't like where all this is going.
Brood Lord change seems good, I'll say that. Now improve the speed from 1.40625 to either 1.875 like BCs and Carriers or maybe 1.6875 to go a good 60% of the way. lol. Your post reeks of Zerg bias. Lurkers already shred marines, taking 3 hits will hardly make a difference, Z is already the strong race in the beta.
How daft of you. I didn't say anything about zerg not being strong in the beta. I didn't say "keep ravagers exactly as they are, nydus worms immortal and buff all these other things". If it were terrible bias, why would I suggest that zealots have MORE of a speed upgrade if charge is removed?
I just fear the lurker being brought in only to be nerfed in a way that makes it too weak to one of the key things it has been historically used against (marines).
Well micromanaged marines can tear shit up in both games. If you make lurker more expensive than they were in SC1 (they're 150/150 now) but make them take 3 hits to kill marines instead of the 2 in SC1, yes, it's a different game, but I fear bio forces will be too good against lurkers cost for cost. Yes, I'm aware there's little point to go bio RIGHT NOW, I'm rather hoping they'll fix that (cyclones have a long way to go still before they are interesting or balanced).
I'll note that Lurkers do also have more life now, but they're zerg units, so who knows, maybe Blizz will decide they shouldn't because it's "not zergish enough".
You actually could maintain the same relationship with the 45 hit points marines of SC2, if SC combat shield were not there, by having lurkers deal 23.
--_
SC1/SC2 = hits
40÷20 &45÷23 =2: No upgrades = 2 hits
40÷19 &45÷22 =2: 1 infantry armour = 3 hits
40÷21 &45÷24 =2: 1 infantry armour but 1 missile attack for lurkers = 2 hits
---
Fact is, combat shield are there. For the same nice relationship to exist, they'd need to deal 28 to marines (with no upgrades on either side).
taking 3 hits will hardly make a difference
You know marines can split up into small groups? Lurkers are meant to be quite good for defending bases against them.
50% more hits required is pretty fucking massive, though apparently you disagree, but maybe you're only imagining lurkers big engagements where a terran goes Leeroy Jenkins into a possibly more expensive amount of lurkers when there are high numbers of each.
Yeah, duh. Of course when you have a lot of them it matters less. Splash that doesn't rely on energy is like that.
|
On May 12 2015 14:02 Fuchsteufelswild wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2015 13:21 FabledIntegral wrote:On May 12 2015 13:15 Fuchsteufelswild wrote:
I don't really like any of this.
The zealot speed change is only good if they remove charge I think, but then they should probably go up to 3.25 or 3.375.
Lurkers, I don't know about that, lurkers typically 2 shot marines in SC and in SC2 you want them to take three now?
I don't like where all this is going.
Brood Lord change seems good, I'll say that. Now improve the speed from 1.40625 to either 1.875 like BCs and Carriers or maybe 1.6875 to go a good 60% of the way. lol. Your post reeks of Zerg bias. Lurkers already shred marines, taking 3 hits will hardly make a difference, Z is already the strong race in the beta. How daft of you. I didn't say anything about zerg not being strong in the beta. I didn't say "keep ravagers exactly as they are, nydus worms immortal and buff all these other things". If it were terrible bias, why would I suggest that zealots have MORE of a speed upgrade if charge is removed? I just fear the lurker being brought in only to be nerfed in a way that makes it too weak to one of the key things it has been historically used against (marines). Well micromanaged marines can tear shit up in both games. If you make lurker more expensive than they were in SC1 (they're 150/150 now) but make them take 3 hits to kill marines instead of the 2 in SC1, yes, it's a different game, but I fear bio forces will be too good against lurkers cost for cost. Yes, I'm aware there's little point to go bio RIGHT NOW, I'm rather hoping they'll fix that (cyclones have a long way to go still before they are interesting or balanced). I'll note that Lurkers do also have more life now, but they're zerg units, so who knows, maybe Blizz will decide they shouldn't because it's "not zergish enough". You actually could maintain the same relationship with the 45 hit points marines of SC2, if SC combat shield were not there, by having lurkers deal 23. --_ SC1/SC2 = hits 40÷20 &45÷23 =2: No upgrades = 2 hits 40÷19 &45÷22 =2: 1 infantry armour = 3 hits 40÷21 &45÷24 =2: 1 infantry armour but 1 missile attack for lurkers = 2 hits --- Fact is, combat shield are there. For the same nice relationship to exist, they'd need to deal 28 to marines (with no upgrades on either side). You know marines can split up into small groups? Lurkers are meant to be quite good for defending bases against them. 50% more hits required is pretty fucking massive, though apparently you disagree, but maybe you're only imagining lurkers big engagements where a terran goes Leeroy Jenkins into a possibly more expensive amount of lurkers when there are high numbers of each. Yeah, duh. Of course when you have a lot of them it matters less. Splash that doesn't rely on energy is like that.
Lurkers are above and beyond the most OP unit in the beta. They have 9 range. I'm not sure what world you live in where you say "mell microed marines do well against lurkers." They don't, at all, unless you're talking extremely small engagements.
|
why do they keep making these tiny adjustments before doing their promised big changes
|
On May 12 2015 13:21 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2015 13:15 Fuchsteufelswild wrote:
I don't really like any of this.
The zealot speed change is only good if they remove charge I think, but then they should probably go up to 3.25 or 3.375.
Lurkers, I don't know about that, lurkers typically 2 shot marines in SC and in SC2 you want them to take three now?
I don't like where all this is going.
Brood Lord change seems good, I'll say that. Now improve the speed from 1.40625 to either 1.875 like BCs and Carriers or maybe 1.6875 to go a good 60% of the way. lol. Your post reeks of Zerg bias. Lurkers already shred marines, taking 3 hits will hardly make a difference, Z is already the strong race in the beta.
Terran is to. Cyclones really good. In general these changes are kind of silly.
|
As a protoss i can agree with thre changes to the MSC recall, but 50 energy? that seems abit too little. Perhaps make it 75 ? Also increasing zealot speed? hmm, will it increase the speed at which they charge?
|
On May 12 2015 11:20 halfaspider wrote:
Would anybody miss them if Blizz just took removed mines, oracles, and SH?
I don't mind WoL with LotV economy. TRUE will win any ZvT.
Can someone cure my ignorance that why having multiple arbiters in Broodwar with mass recall is not OP?
|
I don't really like the mass recall change. Might as well just add a nydus upgrade to nexus so Protoss can teleport their units one by one to other bases. Solves the problem of mobility between bases and not too overpowered like mass recall. We might even see some proxy nexus in the late late game to bring tier 3 units up front towards the opponent's base.
I can stand behind all other changes especially any nerfs to disrupter. I still don't get that unit.
|
On May 12 2015 11:20 halfaspider wrote:
Would anybody miss them if Blizz just took removed mines, oracles, and SH?
I would definitely miss mines. I wouldn't miss mine drops which are possibly the most annoying thing on this planet but widow mines in general are fine.
Agree with the other two, SH have no place in the game right now. Oracle I would prefer if they just re-worked it so that it was basically a stargate observer with a little bit of utility (i.e. remove attack, reduce costs of other abilities).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
