|
On May 22 2015 16:44 kaluro wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2015 16:26 Hider wrote:
Zergs have to invest 150/50 to scout, protoss have to invest energy or 25/75.
Terrans can invest either energy, cheap reapers or if need be, a medivac.
Even with your edit, you still think this is about balance. Didn't you see that I previously (in this thread) made suggestions to compensate DT's and Oracles? It is not about balance. All this is and ever was about, is your statement that Terran lack a reliable scouting option. I just told you the reliable scouting options for zerg/protoss, and showed that terran have those exact same options. So why would a medivac, hellion or reaper not be a reliable scouting option - along with a scan? Especially if scouting with units is more than adequate for zerg/protoss - why can't it be adequate for terrans?
Well just because the time DTs, Oracles, Blink Stalkers usually hit you must be perfectly prepared for it.
This means if you didn't choose the correct tech path you will die.
If you suggest using medivacs, helions, reapers and/or scans for this purpose and you get hit by one of those you will 100% die, because you invested the money you need for defense in scouting tools.
This at least was and is the reason in HotS why Terran couldnt make use of these legit 'scouting' tools.
Simply for the reason by the time those scouting tools are out and such rushes hit you will die by not being perfectly prepared. At least this was the case in TvP. In this regard TvP had this big issue.
|
On May 22 2015 16:23 kaluro wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2015 06:25 Hider wrote:
No terran doesn't have reliable scouting tools, that's the whole issue.
Lol. Terran is the only race that has a scouting tool which can not be denied.
Overseers, observers, hallucinations or any scouting unit can be shot down and heavily denied.
Scan is the only scouting option which is impossible to deny.Terran is the only race that has a 100% reliable scouting tool, as it will always scout the area you want to have scouted. I'm curious if you play terran; that often alters perspective slightly, as to forget how zergs for example, have to sacrifice 150/50 to get scouting in. And if your scan fails to scout the area, how about being like protoss or zerg and using a speedy air unit (Medivac + boost for example) to scout an area. Or a viking, or whatever.
Zergs have to invest 150/50 to scout, protoss have to invest energy or 25/75.
Terrans can invest either energy, cheap reapers or if need be, a medivac.
@bolded sections:
Are you serious man? Have you ever heard of hallucinated Phoenixes? Have you seen their speed?
Tell me exactly how can anyone deny that unless the guy flies directly over your army (a basic luck thing a bit comparable to having scan energy or not or scanning the right place or not - you cannot scan all the time, you need to make mules too, so availability/reliability is not 100% a bit like a hallu - i am not saying
they are equal but still the scan is not 100%!). Please compare that speed of halu phoenix to the speed of a reaper.
And some of us still use SCV to scout you know....and regarding zergs you count 150/50 probably because a dead overseer (?!) but actually you can scout just fine with chanelings which just cost mana, you don't have to sacrifice the overseer which maybe you build anyway for detection.....
Plus you are mentioning all these costs....maybe you should look at another guy below who is describing all the minerals (so actual costs) that Terran needs to put down to make ebay and turrets that could be or could not be necessary.
It makes you go on the backfoot early game....but if you dont do it, one oracle can annihilate your SCVs and its GG.....
Clearly you are overestimating some things please reconsider....
|
On May 22 2015 17:44 Muxtar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2015 16:39 Herecomestrouble wrote:
You're clueless, Zergs don't need to build 8 barracks + addons to go bio nor 8 factories + addons to go mech, these buildings cost money and gas JUST TO GET THEM! and they can be killed ocationally Zerg does need to build bases (at least one more than terran + macro) and queens, and not forget to make injections every ~40 sec in order to keep production. Terran just can spam E button if he forgot to call mules in time and be done with it, but this won't work for Zerg. And Zerg does need to spread creep between those bases (at least) in order to keep his whole army in one place (which is necessary vs. mech). And those bases can easily be harrassed or destroyed (hellions, hellbats, banshees) - and don't you dare to speak about spines/spores - it is just laughable vs ~5 cloaked banshees with +1 attack (at least) or blue-flames hellions/hellbats, who just annihilate all drones in 5 sec if Zerg does not react ASAP. Mech terran in the late game can sacrifice nearly all his SCVs and go full ~190/200 army supply with mules behind, which Zerg can not allow to do. So your whine has no solid ground beneath it.
I think that you are missing his point. The investment required for a tech switch is so high for Terran that it is almost never feasible to do so. The difference between bio and mech is a base full of barracks or factories, as well as the relevant upgrades. The difference between ultras and brood lords is having an ultralisk cavern or a greater spire, because zerg produces all their units from the same structure. Protoss has a similar advantage due to warp gate, though not to as large of a degree.
EDIT: and while the discussion of macro mechanics is more or less irrelevant to this point, I would like to mention the downside of Terran macro. Zerg has the ability to pool larva over time, giving them the ability to rapidly spend the money that has banked up during that time. Protoss is also somewhat more forgiving when players miss production rounds, since they can immediately warp in reinforcements to a battle, which somewhat lessens the pain because enemy reinforcements may not have arrived yet (but this is nullified in PvP). Terran, on the other hand, can never recover the lost opportunity cost of a missed production round. When Terran players miss a round of production, they cannot catch up with a player who is macroing correctly until a battle happens.
I don't think Blizzard should balance around those kinds of failures to begin with, though. Still, play Terran and you'll see that it's not as easy as "drop mules, huge army."
|
On May 22 2015 02:42 royalroadweed wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2015 02:40 The_Templar wrote:
Missile turret build requirement changed back to engineering bay
Worst change ever.
best change ever
|
On May 22 2015 18:11 alexanderzero wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2015 17:44 Muxtar wrote:On May 22 2015 16:39 Herecomestrouble wrote:
You're clueless, Zergs don't need to build 8 barracks + addons to go bio nor 8 factories + addons to go mech, these buildings cost money and gas JUST TO GET THEM! and they can be killed ocationally Zerg does need to build bases (at least one more than terran + macro) and queens, and not forget to make injections every ~40 sec in order to keep production. Terran just can spam E button if he forgot to call mules in time and be done with it, but this won't work for Zerg. And Zerg does need to spread creep between those bases (at least) in order to keep his whole army in one place (which is necessary vs. mech). And those bases can easily be harrassed or destroyed (hellions, hellbats, banshees) - and don't you dare to speak about spines/spores - it is just laughable vs ~5 cloaked banshees with +1 attack (at least) or blue-flames hellions/hellbats, who just annihilate all drones in 5 sec if Zerg does not react ASAP. Mech terran in the late game can sacrifice nearly all his SCVs and go full ~190/200 army supply with mules behind, which Zerg can not allow to do. So your whine has no solid ground beneath it. I think that you are missing his point. The investment required for a tech switch is so high for Terran that it is almost never feasible to do so. The difference between bio and mech is a base full of barracks or factories, as well as the relevant upgrades. The difference between ultras and brood lords is having an ultralisk cavern or a greater spire, because zerg produces all their units from the same structure. Protoss has a similar advantage due to warp gate, though not to as large of a degree. EDIT: and while the discussion of macro mechanics is more or less irrelevant to this point, I would like to mention the downside of Terran macro. Zerg has the ability to pool larva over time, giving them the ability to rapidly spend the money that has banked up during that time. Protoss is also somewhat more forgiving when players miss production rounds, since they can immediately warp in reinforcements to a battle, which somewhat lessens the pain because enemy reinforcements may not have arrived yet (but this is nullified in PvP). Terran, on the other hand, can never recover the lost opportunity cost of a missed production round. When Terran players miss a round of production, they cannot catch up with a player who is macroing correctly until a battle happens. I don't think Blizzard should balance around those kinds of failures to begin with, though. Still, play Terran and you'll see that it's not as easy as "drop mules, huge army."
Protoss has a similar advantage than Zerg due to warpgate? The thing that they have in common is that a production cycle can make a round of new units appear at the same time, but that only applies to Gateway units. But unlike Zerg, Protoss is quite limited due to the restriction of production facilities, like Terran.
I think that Protoss macro is quite similar to Terran in many aspects, except Warpgate for Gateway units, and even with that, the macro scheme behind is similar, limited to 1 unit per production facility each round, commonly around 10-12 units, while Zerg can trhow easily 7 units per production center, between 20 and 30 units).
We also need a ton of Gateways and some tech production buildings (2-3 robos/2-3 stargates). Reactors also decrease the need to build a ton of buildings like back in BW, as effectively reduces in half the amount of buildings you need for units.
However, I agree that the production efficiency for Terrans for Factory/Stargate units is quite low. Protoss' Robotics and Stargates work better, needing only 2-3 for dedicated strategies or 4-6 (seen sometimes on Stargate plays) in a very lategame, rare heavy tech scenario, while Terrans could commonly need around 5 to 8 + some addons to play mech with good production strength. There is a reason behind that: Protoss techy units are more expensive and supply intensive, so building a ton of them a time is impossible for cost restrictions most of the time, while Terrans have more mid-cost units and some low cost ones. That means that in order to optimize your production as a Terran, you need much more extra facilities to keep up with your macro. Protoss also has Chronoboost to optimize the production by a 33% temporarily.
I think that reducing some build times could help Terran a ton in that aspect. Tanks and Banshees, 2 units that have the potential to be included in biomech and pureMech strategies, have quite a long time to build. Tanks are quite okay, but Banshees take simply too much. Reduce the building time of Banshees, Ravens and BCs, but also WidowMines and Reapers, and the production will be much more viable, specially Terran air.
Reducing the buildtime about 25-40% would mean to cut 1 to 3 production facilities out of 5-8 that Mech normally uses.
|
They want to create variety by splitting mech upgrades? That is exactly what counteracts variety so we dont see hybrid compositions as much, because you cant get all necessary upgrades. If they want to see variety they need to keep the mech upgrades together. Also mech needs starport support and the other way around so that is terrible.
Missile turret change is terrible aswell, there are just too many threads in lotv now that are even harder to scout. Protoss has 2 gases in lotv can literally mean anything and oracles come can come faster than ever just as an example.
(Unless the Liberator can reliably deal with air threats then it might be ok.)
|
On May 22 2015 19:02 Aquila- wrote:
They want to create variety by splitting mech upgrades? That is exactly what counteracts variety so we dont see hybrid compositions as much, because you cant get all necessary upgrades. If they want to see variety they need to keep the mech upgrades together. Also mech needs starport support and the other way around so that is terrible.
Missile turret change is terrible aswell, there are just too many threads in lotv now that are even harder to scout. Protoss has 2 gases in lotv can literally mean anything and oracles come can come faster than ever just as an example.
(Unless the Liberator can reliably deal with air threats then it might be ok.)
Tbh I actually thought they would change Banshee speed upgrade requirement to armory from fusion core along with this change. Haven't really seen a lot of people research it.
|
Could someone explain the structure subgroup prioritization fix? I'm not sure what this refers to
|
So Terran got an aa unit that Protoss needs, brilliant.
|
On May 22 2015 16:13 Muxtar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2015 15:39 Bannt wrote:
I don't understand why they insist on having split upgrades. It's just frustrating as a terran user and makes it difficult to transition to other tech effectively. So if zerg has to choose whether to upgrade either melee, or ranged, or air tech - then it is ok. If terran has to choose whether to upgrade either bio, or ground, or air tech - it is OMG UNFAIR IMBALANCED. Nice. P.S. I don't see a single terran player's ban for 'balance whining', which I got banned for when swarmhosts got nerfed. Is teamliquid terran fan-site?
Yes TL is.
You can see this from most polls that involve small terran tweaks that can be considered nerfs. There is always a big majority of voters against it which does not happen on other races tweak/nerf polls. Just like this turret - ebay change.
Even tho the turret without ebay would probably kill alot of options like burrow movement vs. mech, oracle opening, dt vs mech and certainly a few others, terrans on TL aren't getting tired in explaining how this change reduces options for sc2. In all their badness, they come up with the idea that spores needed evochamber as well then - as if it was compareable at all (spores eat a drone and in the end cost more minerals due to that, do you want this to be equalized as well?).
Additionally, in order to operate them, TL here and then releases some 30 pages of terran balance whine on the main page. Stuff that every user in the forum would have probably gotten banned for. Also if you follow TL-Staff comments, you can see frequent siding for terran. I guess several zerg/protoss users have already stopped commenting for not being blamed to play a noob race.
For the greatest players of all time event, players of all races have been discounted for one or another reason while most terrans were not. Just look at the reasoning for nestea and MC being behind taeja, while the same obviously didn't happen in the comparison between life and mvp. In the view of most TL users and TL itself (according to their recent releases) terran has been the most disadvantaged race throughout the life of SC2 and at the same time produced the most great players of all time. TL and its community enjoys to complain about BL/Infestor all day until now but has forgotten that SC2 was GomTvT for the majority of its time during states of measurable imbalance. I have never seen anyone defending BL/Infestor in a way that terrans here defend their GomTvT era. And the same guys who fighted for 5 rax reaper openings to stay viable back in the days and 1base marauder-scv all-ins being an intelligent and defendable strategy have the leadership in opinion on TL now.
All this is obvious and measurable bias. TL overall is terran biased.
According to the average TL terran user, protoss is a noob race that should be designed around terran only to fit their needs (no way adjustments happen the other way round, then the whining starts again) and zergs should be fine with being limited to muta/bling as long as terran can dominate every matchup with spamming marines/marauder from 10+ rax without being limited by gas at all (which is the limitation for other races dominating units). Every change to this will be replied with pure badness. I will leave with that, but certainly could write more, lol.
Apart from this I actually wanted to say that Thors should now become strong single target anti air units (with the liberator being there), before I saw your post and had to comment on it. I had this idea already like 2 years ago and shared it here at TL. It would fit the role of thors much better I think. Imo they should rather 1 shot a mutalisk with a slow firerate then damage 8 of them by 20% (also regeneration problem gets reduced then). Also terran gets a counter to BL or protoss air which is not vikings then. The thor vs muta mechanic sucks badly considering the differences that can be created with or without the use of magic box and how much a few thors can hardcounter balls of mutas with some lucky shots that barely happen.
|
On May 22 2015 19:43 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2015 16:13 Muxtar wrote:On May 22 2015 15:39 Bannt wrote:
I don't understand why they insist on having split upgrades. It's just frustrating as a terran user and makes it difficult to transition to other tech effectively. So if zerg has to choose whether to upgrade either melee, or ranged, or air tech - then it is ok. If terran has to choose whether to upgrade either bio, or ground, or air tech - it is OMG UNFAIR IMBALANCED. Nice. P.S. I don't see a single terran player's ban for 'balance whining', which I got banned for when swarmhosts got nerfed. Is teamliquid terran fan-site? Yes TL is. You can see this from most polls that involve small terran tweaks that can be considered nerfs. There is always a big majority of voters against it which does not happen on other races tweak/nerf polls. Just like this turret - ebay change. Even tho the turret without ebay would probably kill alot of options like burrow movement vs. mech, oracle opening, dt vs mech and certainly a few others, terrans on TL aren't getting tired in explaining how this change reduces options for sc2. In all their badness, they come up with the idea that spores needed evochamber as well then - as if it was compareable at all (spores eat a drone and in the end cost more minerals due to that, do you want this to be equalized as well?). Additionally, in order to operate them, TL here and then releases some 30 pages of terran balance whine on the main page. Stuff that every user in the forum would have probably gotten banned for. Also if you follow TL-Staff comments, you can see frequent siding for terran. I guess several zerg/protoss users have already stopped commenting for not being blamed to play a noob race. For the greatest players of all time event, players of all races have been discounted for one or another reason while most terrans were not. Just look at the reasoning for nestea and MC being behind taeja, while the same obviously didn't happen in the comparison between life and mvp. In the view of most TL users and TL itself (according to their recent releases) terran has been the most disadvantaged race throughout the life of SC2 and at the same time produced the most great players of all time. TL and its community enjoys to complain about BL/Infestor all day until now but has forgotten that SC2 was GomTvT for the majority of its time during states of measurable imbalance. I have never seen anyone defending BL/Infestor in a way that terrans here defend their GomTvT era. And the same guys who fighted for 5 rax reaper openings to stay viable back in the days and 1base marauder-scv all-ins being an intelligent and defendable strategy have the leadership in opinion on TL now. All this is obvious and measurable bias. TL overall is terran biased. According to the average TL terran user, protoss is a noob race that should be designed around terran only to fit their needs (no way adjustments happen the other way round, then the whining starts again) and zergs should be fine with being limited to muta/bling as long as terran can dominate every matchup with spamming marines/marauder from 10+ rax without being limited by gas at all (which is the limitation for other races dominating units). Every change to this will be replied with pure badness. I will leave with that, but certainly could write more, lol. Apart from this I actually wanted to say that Thors should now become strong single target anti air units (with the liberator being there), before I saw your post and had to comment on it. I had this idea already like 2 years ago and shared it here at TL. It would fit the role of thors much better I think. Imo they should rather 1 shot a mutalisk with a slow firerate then damage 8 of them by 20% (also regeneration problem gets reduced then). Also terran gets a counter to BL or protoss air which is not vikings then. The thor vs muta mechanic sucks badly considering the differences that can be created with or without the use of magic box and how much a few thors can hardcounter balls of mutas with some lucky shots that barely happen.
I don't disagree with you necessarily but, if the bias is obvious and measurable, why don't you measure it?
|
On May 22 2015 20:20 Dapper_Cad wrote:
I don't disagree with you necessarily but, if the bias is obvious and measurable, why don't you measure it?
I measured it in words. Measurable doesn't necessarily mean in numbers, does it?
Anyway, if you were a terran-player, you would for sure disagree, wouldn't you?
:p
p.s: if you wanna measure it in numbers, then go ahead and compare polls of ebay-turret change and roach - burrow upgrade change for example. Or any other results of suitable/similar polls on small nerfs for race x vs. race terran. Then you get the numbers you desire.
There is not even a single thing hinting at TL not being terran biased, I am afraid. Therefore even terran users had to agree if they grew some balls, lol.
|
On May 22 2015 19:36 Klowney wrote:
So Terran got an aa unit that Protoss needs, brilliant.
Protoss got Phoenix.
|
On May 22 2015 19:43 LSN wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2015 16:13 Muxtar wrote:On May 22 2015 15:39 Bannt wrote:
I don't understand why they insist on having split upgrades. It's just frustrating as a terran user and makes it difficult to transition to other tech effectively. So if zerg has to choose whether to upgrade either melee, or ranged, or air tech - then it is ok. If terran has to choose whether to upgrade either bio, or ground, or air tech - it is OMG UNFAIR IMBALANCED. Nice. P.S. I don't see a single terran player's ban for 'balance whining', which I got banned for when swarmhosts got nerfed. Is teamliquid terran fan-site? Yes TL is. You can see this from most polls that involve small terran tweaks that can be considered nerfs. There is always a big majority of voters against it which does not happen on other races tweak/nerf polls. Just like this turret - ebay change. Even tho the turret without ebay would probably kill alot of options like burrow movement vs. mech, oracle opening, dt vs mech and certainly a few others, terrans on TL aren't getting tired in explaining how this change reduces options for sc2. In all their badness, they come up with the idea that spores needed evochamber as well then - as if it was compareable at all (spores eat a drone and in the end cost more minerals due to that, do you want this to be equalized as well?). Additionally, in order to operate them, TL here and then releases some 30 pages of terran balance whine on the main page. Stuff that every user in the forum would have probably gotten banned for. Also if you follow TL-Staff comments, you can see frequent siding for terran. I guess several zerg/protoss users have already stopped commenting for not being blamed to play a noob race. For the greatest players of all time event, players of all races have been discounted for one or another reason while most terrans were not. Just look at the reasoning for nestea and MC being behind taeja, while the same obviously didn't happen in the comparison between life and mvp. In the view of most TL users and TL itself (according to their recent releases) terran has been the most disadvantaged race throughout the life of SC2 and at the same time produced the most great players of all time. TL and its community enjoys to complain about BL/Infestor all day until now but has forgotten that SC2 was GomTvT for the majority of its time during states of measurable imbalance. I have never seen anyone defending BL/Infestor in a way that terrans here defend their GomTvT era. And the same guys who fighted for 5 rax reaper openings to stay viable back in the days and 1base marauder-scv all-ins being an intelligent and defendable strategy have the leadership in opinion on TL now. All this is obvious and measurable bias. TL overall is terran biased. According to the average TL terran user, protoss is a noob race that should be designed around terran only to fit their needs (no way adjustments happen the other way round, then the whining starts again) and zergs should be fine with being limited to muta/bling as long as terran can dominate every matchup with spamming marines/marauder from 10+ rax without being limited by gas at all (which is the limitation for other races dominating units). Every change to this will be replied with pure badness. I will leave with that, but certainly could write more, lol. Apart from this I actually wanted to say that Thors should now become strong single target anti air units (with the liberator being there), before I saw your post and had to comment on it. I had this idea already like 2 years ago and shared it here at TL. It would fit the role of thors much better I think. Imo they should rather 1 shot a mutalisk with a slow firerate then damage 8 of them by 20% (also regeneration problem gets reduced then). Also terran gets a counter to BL or protoss air which is not vikings then. The thor vs muta mechanic sucks badly considering the differences that can be created with or without the use of magic box and how much a few thors can hardcounter balls of mutas with some lucky shots that barely happen.
Brilliant. Just brilliant.
+100500 to it.
|
On May 22 2015 19:36 Klowney wrote:
So Terran got an aa unit that Protoss needs, brilliant.
We got Tempest, remember?
|
Thank you.
Probably inbefore getting banned for giving opposition (or maybe being executed by flak??). lol
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On May 22 2015 18:11 alexanderzero wrote:Show nested quote +On May 22 2015 17:44 Muxtar wrote:On May 22 2015 16:39 Herecomestrouble wrote:
You're clueless, Zergs don't need to build 8 barracks + addons to go bio nor 8 factories + addons to go mech, these buildings cost money and gas JUST TO GET THEM! and they can be killed ocationally Zerg does need to build bases (at least one more than terran + macro) and queens, and not forget to make injections every ~40 sec in order to keep production. Terran just can spam E button if he forgot to call mules in time and be done with it, but this won't work for Zerg. And Zerg does need to spread creep between those bases (at least) in order to keep his whole army in one place (which is necessary vs. mech). And those bases can easily be harrassed or destroyed (hellions, hellbats, banshees) - and don't you dare to speak about spines/spores - it is just laughable vs ~5 cloaked banshees with +1 attack (at least) or blue-flames hellions/hellbats, who just annihilate all drones in 5 sec if Zerg does not react ASAP. Mech terran in the late game can sacrifice nearly all his SCVs and go full ~190/200 army supply with mules behind, which Zerg can not allow to do. So your whine has no solid ground beneath it. I think that you are missing his point. The investment required for a tech switch is so high for Terran that it is almost never feasible to do so. The difference between bio and mech is a base full of barracks or factories, as well as the relevant upgrades. The difference between ultras and brood lords is having an ultralisk cavern or a greater spire, because zerg produces all their units from the same structure. Protoss has a similar advantage due to warp gate, though not to as large of a degree. EDIT: and while the discussion of macro mechanics is more or less irrelevant to this point, I would like to mention the downside of Terran macro. Zerg has the ability to pool larva over time, giving them the ability to rapidly spend the money that has banked up during that time. Protoss is also somewhat more forgiving when players miss production rounds, since they can immediately warp in reinforcements to a battle, which somewhat lessens the pain because enemy reinforcements may not have arrived yet (but this is nullified in PvP). Terran, on the other hand, can never recover the lost opportunity cost of a missed production round. When Terran players miss a round of production, they cannot catch up with a player who is macroing correctly until a battle happens. I don't think Blizzard should balance around those kinds of failures to begin with, though. Still, play Terran and you'll see that it's not as easy as "drop mules, huge army."
Zerg produces all their units from the same structureS, and we do need many of them, and actually it is 450 minerals per base (hatchery + queen), and you need at least 4 of them to play macro vs. bio terran, and at least 5 to play vs. mech.
As for macro: you mix up things (I suppose intentionally), zerg can pool up larva indeed, but to do it he has to make injects every 40 sec and do not forget about it a single time, while terran and protoss can spend their all their energy for mules/busts at one time, and have near the same buff (less for protoss, more for terran). And of course you can queue units up to 5 in your sctructures (and it gives you more time for other things to do), what zerg cannot do.
I don't even mention drop/prism harrass posibillity which is absent for zerg at the moment, and flying bases (Inferno Pools say hello).
|
I have always kinda felt like that but hated to admit it- seems like terran has always been given free pass to balance whine because they are seen as the "hard race" to play hence have the rights to do so.
I agree with your thor change too.
|
On May 22 2015 19:36 Klowney wrote:
So Terran got an aa unit that Protoss needs, brilliant.
I think Terran does need a unit like the liberator so its feasible that we can build BC's and actually protect them, but I agree with you that Protoss needs better aa, specifically a ground unit. The fact the toss has to put up with only having bluegoon and tickle robot for ground based aa is pretty dumb.
|
I was hyped as fuck for hots when beta was online, it is not even close to that now 
I introduced 5 of my friends to starcraft and none of them are playing anymore. We all played up to diamond and master league then it became stressful. This is the game i respect most and i really want to see starcraft become big again but i don't see it happening with subtle changes like these. Because even i don't want to play ladder after losing a few times, heck i don't want to play after a winning spree.
I think they should drastically change protoss warp gate mechanics, terran tech after bio and remove free unit spawning abilities from zerg(boordlord, infestor and swarm host) While it can change the balance immensely, increasing armor or decreasing a units cost is not a big change towards making the game more fun. They can try to balance the game after changing a lot for each race so they at least pull their existing fanbase to check the new stuff out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
