|
On May 29 2015 14:54 ImYourHuckleberry wrote:
I've played several games to specifically test the "Liberator". After 4 games (2 Protoss and 2 Zerg) I feel this unit is a mixed bag with little place in the game: It doesn't know how to harass, it is too late for mid game and it cannot be meta. Here are my reasons: 1) The tech path is too long so the potential to harass is hilarious: You need a Starport + Reactor + Amory. Then you need to research its ability to attack ground which takes 200/200. I might as well proxy BC at this point. 2) Once the unit is finally complete, it is too fragile for the mid-game. I am dominating a Protoss after early harass in the probe line with helions, so I decide to keep the aggression on with the "Liberator". Turns out, Nexus cannon shuts it completely down. Why wouldn't I just want to go with a Banshee, instead of losing this crappy unit to it's 10 minutes transformation (in game 3 seconds, but that is a lifetime in sc2). Finally, the meta game: All those pictures of the "Liberators" promo are misleading. I actually played a Protoss who decided to counter mass void rays. Turns out all you need to do is spread voidrays to utterly destroy this unit (same as mutas) and any competent player can do this.
If this post seems like I am upset, it is because I am. Terran hasn't received a true mid/late game unit since the inception of WoL. With HOTS, they just built on existing units like the reaper or removing research for the siege tank or medivac speed. It is getting disgusting how little they have changed the race. The irony is, I won 3/4 games in this critique, but it is because I TRANSITIONED TO HOTS UNITS. Again, I see little place for this unit until they drastically adjust the tech tree or change the transformation time.
EDIT: Also I would be happy to post the replays, but many times it is not viewed b/c many people don't have a beta key. But I will post on request.
Yes, the high research costs for the ground attack upgrade is a real problem since the air attack of the liberator is essentially useless. This means that there wont any use of the liberator in the early or midgame, which makes the unit very situational.
|
On May 29 2015 15:27 Loccstana wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2015 14:54 ImYourHuckleberry wrote:
I've played several games to specifically test the "Liberator". After 4 games (2 Protoss and 2 Zerg) I feel this unit is a mixed bag with little place in the game: It doesn't know how to harass, it is too late for mid game and it cannot be meta. Here are my reasons: 1) The tech path is too long so the potential to harass is hilarious: You need a Starport + Reactor + Amory. Then you need to research its ability to attack ground which takes 200/200. I might as well proxy BC at this point. 2) Once the unit is finally complete, it is too fragile for the mid-game. I am dominating a Protoss after early harass in the probe line with helions, so I decide to keep the aggression on with the "Liberator". Turns out, Nexus cannon shuts it completely down. Why wouldn't I just want to go with a Banshee, instead of losing this crappy unit to it's 10 minutes transformation (in game 3 seconds, but that is a lifetime in sc2). Finally, the meta game: All those pictures of the "Liberators" promo are misleading. I actually played a Protoss who decided to counter mass void rays. Turns out all you need to do is spread voidrays to utterly destroy this unit (same as mutas) and any competent player can do this.
If this post seems like I am upset, it is because I am. Terran hasn't received a true mid/late game unit since the inception of WoL. With HOTS, they just built on existing units like the reaper or removing research for the siege tank or medivac speed. It is getting disgusting how little they have changed the race. The irony is, I won 3/4 games in this critique, but it is because I TRANSITIONED TO HOTS UNITS. Again, I see little place for this unit until they drastically adjust the tech tree or change the transformation time.
EDIT: Also I would be happy to post the replays, but many times it is not viewed b/c many people don't have a beta key. But I will post on request. Yes, the high research costs for the ground attack upgrade is a real problem since the air attack of the liberator is essentially useless. This means that there wont any use of the liberator in the early or midgame, which makes the unit very situational.
I get the feeling that the very high resource cost per supply makes it extra strong in maxed armies. Does any other unit cost 150 resources per supply?
|
On May 29 2015 15:33 Cascade wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2015 15:27 Loccstana wrote:On May 29 2015 14:54 ImYourHuckleberry wrote:
I've played several games to specifically test the "Liberator". After 4 games (2 Protoss and 2 Zerg) I feel this unit is a mixed bag with little place in the game: It doesn't know how to harass, it is too late for mid game and it cannot be meta. Here are my reasons: 1) The tech path is too long so the potential to harass is hilarious: You need a Starport + Reactor + Amory. Then you need to research its ability to attack ground which takes 200/200. I might as well proxy BC at this point. 2) Once the unit is finally complete, it is too fragile for the mid-game. I am dominating a Protoss after early harass in the probe line with helions, so I decide to keep the aggression on with the "Liberator". Turns out, Nexus cannon shuts it completely down. Why wouldn't I just want to go with a Banshee, instead of losing this crappy unit to it's 10 minutes transformation (in game 3 seconds, but that is a lifetime in sc2). Finally, the meta game: All those pictures of the "Liberators" promo are misleading. I actually played a Protoss who decided to counter mass void rays. Turns out all you need to do is spread voidrays to utterly destroy this unit (same as mutas) and any competent player can do this.
If this post seems like I am upset, it is because I am. Terran hasn't received a true mid/late game unit since the inception of WoL. With HOTS, they just built on existing units like the reaper or removing research for the siege tank or medivac speed. It is getting disgusting how little they have changed the race. The irony is, I won 3/4 games in this critique, but it is because I TRANSITIONED TO HOTS UNITS. Again, I see little place for this unit until they drastically adjust the tech tree or change the transformation time.
EDIT: Also I would be happy to post the replays, but many times it is not viewed b/c many people don't have a beta key. But I will post on request. Yes, the high research costs for the ground attack upgrade is a real problem since the air attack of the liberator is essentially useless. This means that there wont any use of the liberator in the early or midgame, which makes the unit very situational. I get the feeling that the very high resource cost per supply makes it extra strong in maxed armies. Does any other unit cost 150 resources per supply?
There is no point in massing liberators because it can be easily countered with long range units like vikings/carriers or units with high armor such as battlecruisers/corruptor. Also as an air unit, it is vunerable to AOE attacks such as storm, that new viper ability, fungal growth etc.
|
On May 29 2015 15:38 Loccstana wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2015 15:33 Cascade wrote:On May 29 2015 15:27 Loccstana wrote:On May 29 2015 14:54 ImYourHuckleberry wrote:
I've played several games to specifically test the "Liberator". After 4 games (2 Protoss and 2 Zerg) I feel this unit is a mixed bag with little place in the game: It doesn't know how to harass, it is too late for mid game and it cannot be meta. Here are my reasons: 1) The tech path is too long so the potential to harass is hilarious: You need a Starport + Reactor + Amory. Then you need to research its ability to attack ground which takes 200/200. I might as well proxy BC at this point. 2) Once the unit is finally complete, it is too fragile for the mid-game. I am dominating a Protoss after early harass in the probe line with helions, so I decide to keep the aggression on with the "Liberator". Turns out, Nexus cannon shuts it completely down. Why wouldn't I just want to go with a Banshee, instead of losing this crappy unit to it's 10 minutes transformation (in game 3 seconds, but that is a lifetime in sc2). Finally, the meta game: All those pictures of the "Liberators" promo are misleading. I actually played a Protoss who decided to counter mass void rays. Turns out all you need to do is spread voidrays to utterly destroy this unit (same as mutas) and any competent player can do this.
If this post seems like I am upset, it is because I am. Terran hasn't received a true mid/late game unit since the inception of WoL. With HOTS, they just built on existing units like the reaper or removing research for the siege tank or medivac speed. It is getting disgusting how little they have changed the race. The irony is, I won 3/4 games in this critique, but it is because I TRANSITIONED TO HOTS UNITS. Again, I see little place for this unit until they drastically adjust the tech tree or change the transformation time.
EDIT: Also I would be happy to post the replays, but many times it is not viewed b/c many people don't have a beta key. But I will post on request. Yes, the high research costs for the ground attack upgrade is a real problem since the air attack of the liberator is essentially useless. This means that there wont any use of the liberator in the early or midgame, which makes the unit very situational. I get the feeling that the very high resource cost per supply makes it extra strong in maxed armies. Does any other unit cost 150 resources per supply? There is no point in massing liberators because it can be easily countered with long range units like vikings/carriers or units with high armor such as battlecruisers/corruptor. Also as an air unit, it is vunerable to AOE attacks such as storm, that new viper ability, fungal growth etc.
I didn't say massing them. Ofc you won't build a maxed army of 50 liberators. Or so I hope! :o And yes, there are counters to the liberator, and rightfully so. Every unit should have counters, soft or hard.
But out of the 150 army supply or so of a maxed mech or airterran army, maybe spending 10-20 supply on 5-10 liberators can be a good investment?
|
are any other mech players starting to feel like the changes from the last two patches are rewarding turtle play?... in TvP we use to be able to use a cyclone to repel drops/oracle.. now if we fast expand we die to proxy stargate..... and tvt is tank drops into mass viking tank..... tvz feels like the best matchup but with the new liberator... tank drops into mass tank liberator on three base feels like the most all around build.... so frustrating for mech players who want to drop and run around the map with cyclone hellion.... and now... have to hide behind turrets for 14 minutes
|
On May 29 2015 11:17 Loccstana wrote:
I find it really strange that the liberator cant target buildings. Its ground attack does regular damage, not spell damage correct? This should be a bug that blizzard needs to fix immediately. Also, I dont agree with separating the air and ground upgrades. Maybe at least ground and air should share attack upgrades.]
Also, the transparency of the ground target indicator should be increased. Right now it really makes things difficult to see underneath.
They do not attack buildings and that is by design. Leapfrogging Liberators would be impossible to deal with by anything but suicide missions with everything the opponents have.
|
On May 29 2015 15:14 Loccstana wrote:
Watched some Koreans pros streaming games with the liberator and here is my impression of it:
In its current state, the liberator is pretty much useless in its anti air role. The low damage per shot, dps and range of its air attack means it is terrible against high hp units (capital ships, voidrays), units with high armor (corruptor, capital ships also), or units with long range (viking, range upgraded phoenix). The only units it is somewhat effective against are mutalisks, however that is only when the opponent clumps them together. If the opponent does some basic micro and spreads out his mutas before attacking, the mutas will win when the muta/liberator ratio exceeds 2. Furthermore, due to its low damage, the liberator is great at wounding mutas but bad at actually killing them. Frequently, the zerg player will snipe a liberator with the mutas, fly them away and wait for a few seconds for the health regen before attacking again. I can see the liberator being used to complement marines against stacked mass muta, but the widow mine already performs this role at a much lower cost.
The ground attack is more useful but still is a situational weapon that must be supported by other units. It is good at holding chokes or attacking relatively immobile units like lurkers, siege tanks, and swarm hosts. When out in the open against more mobile units like stalkers or roaches, it is very easy for these units to dodge the areas targeted by the liberators, thus requiring heavy micro by the player to constantly reposition the target circles. The liberator also does a lot of overkill against low hp units, so it is ineffective against small units like marines or zerglings. Strangely, it does not attack buildings, which is a bug that needs to be fixed immediately.
Summary: The liberator, as of right now, clearly does not fulfill the anti-air role Blizzard intended it for. It performs its anti-ground satisfactorily, but requires heavy micro and a balanced supporting army composition to achieve maximum effectiveness. Overall I like the design of the liberator in its anti-ground role, but the anti-air role really needs to be looked at and improved.
Just say that you want 1A-to-the-victory units. Your post reeks of total bias. I doubt you would want Blizzard to give this unit to Z or P.
|
Played with Liberator yesterday.. and I fully agree with ImYourHuckleberry & Loccstana. Unit is just not good in anything it does.
AA is disappointing (zerg went mass muta, I went thor liberator and we actually traded armies, can you imagine? Swarmhost + muta composition lategame is impossible to deal with, because nothing can catch swarmhosts except stimmed bio).
AG is frustrating. When you see the enemy literally just stepping out of the circle when deploying it just makes you really really sad. Frustrating to use is the best description and if there is antiair it's not worth the cost because they are paperplanes.
People who defend that unit and theorycraft how useful they can be in this and that composition just need to play a few games with it for themselves. It's really hard to explain how sad you will be when testing this unit.
|
AG was obviously supposed to be hard to use, but if the unit is indeed underwhelming at AA it's more problematic.
|
On May 29 2015 18:38 _indigo_ wrote:
Played with Liberator yesterday.. and I fully agree with ImYourHuckleberry & Loccstana. Unit is just not good in anything it does.
AA is disappointing (zerg went mass muta, I went thor liberator and we actually traded armies, can you imagine? Swarmhost + muta composition lategame is impossible to deal with, because nothing can catch swarmhosts except stimmed bio).
AG is frustrating. When you see the enemy literally just stepping out of the circle when deploying it just makes you really really sad. Frustrating to use is the best description and if there is antiair it's not worth the cost because they are paperplanes.
People who defend that unit and theorycraft how useful they can be in this and that composition just need to play a few games with it for themselves. It's really hard to explain how sad you will be when testing this unit.
Honestly the siege up is simply way too long. It makes the unit feel like something that can only be used prior to battles (which encourages more turtling instead of more "offensive" positional play). You simply can't set up it during an engagement. The Siege Tank on the other hand can get away with a higher siege up period as the enemy can't as easily avoid the damage.
If Siege-duration was significantly faster, I would however like the unit from a design perspective because it does feel as if it should allow terran to play a different style.
But as it is right now, its probably pretty good at playing a very turtly defensive style while also having some flexibility vs Mutas.
AG was obviously supposed to be hard to use, but if the unit is indeed underwhelming at AA it's more problematic.
It was never intended as a hardcounter AA unit. But rather something that is mobile and deals (relatively) well with masses of enemy AA units while also being a positional unit vs ground units.
|
You can't judge the liberator in its current state very well given the bug that makes it mega more powerful.
|
I'm progressively losing more and more of the hope I did actually have in LotV.
|
After reading the last posts I feel my hopes for a fresh and useful Terran unit are almost gone. When the Lib was announced I wondered (I think many ppl too) why Terrans gets an Anti-air flying unit. Like ImYourHuckleberry said in HotS Terran got no design changing unit. We got the widow mine and the Hellion 2.0 (Hellbat). Both the widow mine and the Hellbat are no micro units, so the actual chance of doing sth great with them is pretty low. You burrow mines and just wait and Hellbats are pure A+click units.
For me SC2 game design changes feel so random. I am very interesting to see how Terran Pros deal with the tools they are giving, because I have a hard time finding the right place for the new units.
|
I feel it's an attemp to develop new style for terran :
-You have barracks centric build : bio.
- You have facto/centric : mech
- Now you have starport centric build : skyterran. Liberator is the "air siege tank" as well as the air anti-light.
But the thing is Barrack have marine which is mineral only, factory has hellion/hellbat, but all sky unit need a lot of gaz. That means you can't really go for sky, but rather mech or bio then transition into sky maybe.
Skyterran if it exist is imo center around banshee, and liberator is the transition of banshee opener. I feel they want to promote banshee, liberator, then they build fusion core, and go for banshee upgrade, and then BC. But IMO it's not realistic at all as it's just too much gaz, and you do nothing with your mineral. So you force ever sky + bio/or hellion, and the bio style/mech old shool are just better than this skyterran, so not really viable IMO in this state.
|
Japan71 Posts
The circle of the Lib AG should be made invisible to enermy, or at least require a detector to see it. Right now it has absolutely no use imo. It doesn't attack building and takes like forever to siege up. I'd rather have 1/3 the damage and make it have 10-12 range flat.
|
On May 29 2015 17:46 usethis2 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2015 15:14 Loccstana wrote:
Watched some Koreans pros streaming games with the liberator and here is my impression of it:
In its current state, the liberator is pretty much useless in its anti air role. The low damage per shot, dps and range of its air attack means it is terrible against high hp units (capital ships, voidrays), units with high armor (corruptor, capital ships also), or units with long range (viking, range upgraded phoenix). The only units it is somewhat effective against are mutalisks, however that is only when the opponent clumps them together. If the opponent does some basic micro and spreads out his mutas before attacking, the mutas will win when the muta/liberator ratio exceeds 2. Furthermore, due to its low damage, the liberator is great at wounding mutas but bad at actually killing them. Frequently, the zerg player will snipe a liberator with the mutas, fly them away and wait for a few seconds for the health regen before attacking again. I can see the liberator being used to complement marines against stacked mass muta, but the widow mine already performs this role at a much lower cost.
The ground attack is more useful but still is a situational weapon that must be supported by other units. It is good at holding chokes or attacking relatively immobile units like lurkers, siege tanks, and swarm hosts. When out in the open against more mobile units like stalkers or roaches, it is very easy for these units to dodge the areas targeted by the liberators, thus requiring heavy micro by the player to constantly reposition the target circles. The liberator also does a lot of overkill against low hp units, so it is ineffective against small units like marines or zerglings. Strangely, it does not attack buildings, which is a bug that needs to be fixed immediately.
Summary: The liberator, as of right now, clearly does not fulfill the anti-air role Blizzard intended it for. It performs its anti-ground satisfactorily, but requires heavy micro and a balanced supporting army composition to achieve maximum effectiveness. Overall I like the design of the liberator in its anti-ground role, but the anti-air role really needs to be looked at and improved. Just say that you want 1A-to-the-victory units. Your post reeks of total bias. I doubt you would want Blizzard to give this unit to Z or P.
Maybe you should actually read my post and stop double posting.
|
Liberator should have no deployment time in my opinion, but still retain its un-deployment time.
I've had a few really shitty scenarios with it where I've been between my 2nd and third and protoss has a clear route to either, I can either deploy my liberators where I am and defend my 2nd, in which case protoss wrecks my third, or I move over to my third and deploy there, giving protoss time to move around and attack my 2nd. If I try and do a fake out and move to my third without deploying he can run up and wreck me as it takes so long to deploy you can micro around it easy, especially with blink.
Tanks are fundamentally different, you siege a tank and its got a huge area it can hit, you siege this it has a tiny area it can hit in comparison.
I like the idea behind the liberator but why did they have to make it so damn underpowered to start with, I though Blizzard usually made things OP and toned them down, was actually looking forward to be stupidly overpowered for a little while haha
|
On May 29 2015 18:38 _indigo_ wrote:
Played with Liberator yesterday.. and I fully agree with ImYourHuckleberry & Loccstana. Unit is just not good in anything it does.
AA is disappointing (zerg went mass muta, I went thor liberator and we actually traded armies, can you imagine? Swarmhost + muta composition lategame is impossible to deal with, because nothing can catch swarmhosts except stimmed bio).
AG is frustrating. When you see the enemy literally just stepping out of the circle when deploying it just makes you really really sad. Frustrating to use is the best description and if there is antiair it's not worth the cost because they are paperplanes.
People who defend that unit and theorycraft how useful they can be in this and that composition just need to play a few games with it for themselves. It's really hard to explain how sad you will be when testing this unit.
Could one potentially use it to defend parts of the map, or is it just gonna get splattered?
|
Japan71 Posts
If the circle is visible, I doubt it will have any use at all. Any opponent with half a brain will avoid it.
|
Liberator should have no deployment time in my opinion, but still retain its un-deployment time.
Yeh I can follow that. I think undeployment time is needed in order to make sure counterplay exist and that there is a punishment for mispositioning. But deployment time should at most be 1 second. Otherwise it will be absolutely impossible to siege it up during an engagement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
