EPTLotV Balance Update Preview - May 21 - Page 5
| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
Killmouse
Austria5700 Posts
| ||
|
Hider
Denmark9341 Posts
The turret, tunneling claws, and terran upgrade separation changes really makes sense to me. Turret is not a tech path. It's a get this or else you might due to stupid cheese because your scouting tools aren't reliant enough. | ||
|
Pseudorandom
United States120 Posts
On May 22 2015 04:48 ZigguratOfUr wrote: The turret, tunneling claws, and terran upgrade separation changes really makes sense to me. You want people to be forced to commit to some techpath or other especially with the greater economy. If anything I think they should do more of that. What greater economy? From what I know they have the same economy, with more workers at the start, the mineral total lessened, and some patches are smaller. Everything seems to be a reduction to the amount of money you'll get, but you start off higher. | ||
|
knOxStarcraft
Canada422 Posts
| ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On May 22 2015 05:00 Pseudorandom wrote: What greater economy? From what I know they have the same economy, with more workers at the start, the mineral total lessened, and some patches are smaller. Everything seems to be a reduction to the amount of money you'll get, but you start off higher. I meant a greater kickoff to the economy. On May 22 2015 04:56 Hider wrote: Turret is not a tech path. It's a get this or else you might due to stupid cheese because your scouting tools aren't reliant enough. That's part of the game too. Openers are too homogeneous when you're completely safe from every cheese with a single opener. If your scouting tools are not reliable enough (which I don't agree with as a side note), that's what needs to be fixed. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On May 22 2015 05:02 knOxStarcraft wrote: Nothing about adding ladder or fixing the mini map? Guess I'll be playing a lot of hearthstone I can boycott Starcraft, but I can't boycott blizzard  | ||
|
hansonslee
United States2027 Posts
| ||
|
SetGuitarsToKill
Canada28396 Posts
On May 22 2015 05:07 hansonslee wrote: This still doesn't solve how Terran has the most trouble transitioning their tech. For a "flexible" race, it still cannot change its composition whenever the need is necessary. Not having everything being easily available to you is part of this thing SC2 has been kind of lacking in, it's call "strategy" | ||
|
IceBerrY
Germany220 Posts
Still no trying out of the proposed economy changes, why not? No Protoss tweaks. I kinda understand that the new terran unit is a big deal and that they want to focus on it first, but this doesn´t mean they aren´t allowed to make more drastic changes, its a damn beta after all. I would love if we would receive a blogpost in the next few days, at least letting us know which direction they take and what they are having in mind, because i can not see a common theme here. | ||
|
hansonslee
United States2027 Posts
On May 22 2015 05:09 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Not having everything being easily available to you is part of this thing SC2 has been kind of lacking in, it's call "strategy" Well, Zerg can change its tech from ground units to air, and Protoss can do the same. Terran have to stick with the same composition for the most of the game (with the exception of its mirror match up). If you want strategy, then you should introduce the race's ability to adapt and counter the opponent's style. Plus, it's more dynamic and fun to see tech transitions. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9341 Posts
That's part of the game too. Openers are too homogeneous when you're completely safe from every cheese with a single opener. If your scouting tools are not reliable enough (which I don't agree with as a side note), that's what needs to be fixed. That type of logic is what keeps progress from occuring in an industry. You gotta look at what is fun about gameplay and what isn't. I guarantee you that almost all players hate the coinflippy openings of the game. It's not surprise that MOBA's have become so succesful by removing this element from the game. | ||
|
PinoKotsBeer
Netherlands1385 Posts
| ||
|
chipmonklord17
United States11944 Posts
On May 22 2015 05:14 Hider wrote: That type of logic is what keeps progress from occuring in an industry. You gotta look at what is fun about gameplay and what isn't. I guarantee you that almost all players hate the coinflippy openings of the game. It's not surprise that MOBA's have become so succesful by removing this element from the game. There's definitely still coinflips in MOBAs. They're different kind of coinflips but they have them. Hell the entire pick/ban phase is partially a coinflip. Then there are things like early jungle invades, early buff steals and the like that occur in LoL | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On May 22 2015 05:13 hansonslee wrote: Well, Zerg can change its tech from ground units to air, and Protoss can do the same. Terran have to stick with the same composition for the most of the game (with the exception of its mirror match up). If you want strategy, then you should introduce the race's ability to adapt and counter the opponent's style. Plus, it's more dynamic and fun to see tech transitions. Zerg and Protoss can't "just do it", they have to setup forever to do so, or start mixing it in early. That's not different at all for Terran in TvZ and TvT. Opening and constantly producing a decent amount of banshee, viking and raven is possible. Playing defensively and eventually switching into a mainly airbased composition too. I don't see what you are talking about. If you want to, you can. If instead of playing defensively and getting a setup and a position where this starts making sense, you rather choose to use your resources to throw units into your opponent, then that's your choice. You can't play aggressive with unit replenishment and defensive with tech build up at the same time, that's not different at all for Zerg or Protoss. | ||
|
Solar424
United States4001 Posts
| ||
|
LSN
Germany696 Posts
On May 22 2015 02:47 Glorfindel! wrote: Yeah, I dont see any reason for Terran needing an Ebay to make a turret. Why on earth does Zerg not requires Evos to makes spores, lets revert that aswell then. Probably cause zerglings & roaches both can't attack air while marines can and cost only minerals. Blizzard should make siege tanks a bit stronger and get the siege mode upgrade back as well imo. That would be good overall. I don't understand why ppl complain. This is nowhere near final anyway. Announcing big changes does not forbid them to do minor tweaks! | ||
|
FaiFai
Peru53 Posts
On May 22 2015 05:13 hansonslee wrote: Well, Zerg can change its tech from ground units to air, and Protoss can do the same. Terran have to stick with the same composition for the most of the game (with the exception of its mirror match up). If you want strategy, then you should introduce the race's ability to adapt and counter the opponent's style. Plus, it's more dynamic and fun to see tech transitions. Every race can change their composition, that is viable or going work is different, saying that zerg can change its tech from ground to air, is like say terran can change from mech to bio, it is possible, but in both situations the investement in a compostion was already made, and for zerg are 3 different compositions from ground melee, ground range, and air, what make the switches more restrictive, i don see ur point, specially where terran had an unique upgrade for mech air and ground, what makes so flexible. | ||
|
Ramiz1989
12124 Posts
On May 22 2015 05:24 Solar424 wrote: The Liberator: because Terran needs even more ways to deal with Mutas Yup, they are continuing with their "hard counter" policy and it is really stupid. I am quite surprised(or not) that they have decided to revert the Roach changes back to the HotS(well almost), but at the same time left Ravagers in the current sad and miserable state which has one niche use and that is to destroy Force Fields for the cost of 100/100. I would gladly leave Roach burrow movement in game from the start but increase research time of Burrow so it doesn't kick in too early and then redesign Ravagers completely, than let it be like this. Right now, Ravagers cost too much and don't offer anything but Corrosive Bile that's very easy to dodge. They are even weaker than Roaches in HP, for 100/100 and 3 supply, it doesn't make any sense. Also when Protoss has like 10 Sentries, you having 5 Ravagers or so doesn't matter at all because they have cooldown for their Bile while Sentries just keep spamming Force Fields and Protoss will kill part of the army he is supposed to kill before you manage to cast second wave of Corrosive Biles. I am fine with Swarm Host burrow movement being removed, but their explanation certainly doesn't make any sense as there are a lot of units with complex abilities and burrow movement that is already on Infestors and Roaches isn't one of them. | ||
|
Rukis
United States252 Posts
| ||
The_Templar
your Country52797 Posts
On May 22 2015 05:38 Rukis wrote: I find this hilarious you guys sit there and vote approved, neutral, approved and then disapprove of the overall patch? Hypocrites please. Not saying all of you but this poll is inconsistent :/ makes me sad to such disapproval. After seeing all the approval flying around. The changes by themselves are mostly fine, but the overall direction isn't. | ||
| ||
