This patch brings a brand new unit to the Terran army, a chat system rework and a bevy of bug fixes to the Legacy of the Void beta. Please note that the patch is being distrubted throughout the day and may not be available in your region yet. Find a full list of them in the patch notes below:
Social
Chat System
The old StarCraft II Chat System has been removed and a new embedded chat dialogue has been added.
Type /help into chat for a full list of commands.
Friends List
The Friends List has been given a slight visual refresh and should feel more responsive.
Players Near You has been moved from the Home Screen into the Friends List.
General
Gas geysers now contain 2000 gas.
Terran
New Unit: Liberator
Mechanical Air Unit
Fires 2 missiles that deal 7 splash damage to air units.
Can be deployed to attack ground units, losing mobility and anti-air attack.
While deployed, the Liberator attacks any ground units in the target zone for 85 damage.
Single target damage.
Cannot attack buildings while deployed.
Vehicle and Ship Weapon upgrades have been separated again.
Adjusted building subgroup priorities to the following:
Command Center > Planetary Fortress
Barracks > Factory > Starport
Engineering Bay > Armory
Zerg
Corruptor
Reverted ability to Corruption but now can be auto-cast.
Swarm Hosts
Can no longer move while burrowed.
Roaches
Burrow movement once again needs to be researched.
Adjusted building subgroup priorities to the following:
Hatchery > Lair > Hive
Evolutionary Chamber > Spire > Greater Spire
Hydralisk Den > Lurker Den
Protoss
Adjusted building subgroup priorities to the following:
Gateway > Robotics > Stargate
Bug Fixes
The Raven ready sound no longer plays when a Cyclone is created.
Fixed an issue that caused a newly morphed Ravager to glide on the ground.
Neural Parasite will no longer persist through Oracle’s Stasis Trap.
A unit can no longer be targeted with Graviton Beam while are under the effect of knock-back.
Fixed an issue that caused units to attack destructible doodads they were railed to.
Siege Tanks in siege mode should no longer become covered by creep when moved by a Medivac.
Fixed an issue that prevented unburrowed Swarm Hosts from spawning locusts when selected in a group with burrowed Swarm Hosts.
Locusts should now correctly have a life duration of 25.
Adepts can no longer phase into buildings under construction.
Lurker attacks should no longer be visible through the Fog of War.
Fixed an issue that caused the Adept to glide if issued a move command immediately after using Psionic Transfer.
Caustic Spray and Parasitic Bomb will now properly trigger an “Under Attack” alert.
Adjusting the viewing speed of a replay should no longer cause the timestamp to jump around.
The Hellbat's attack will now correctly appear blue with the Infernal Pre-Igniters upgrade.
The “Activate Stasis Trap” hotkey is now available for customization.
Cyclones will no longer automatically target disguised changelings when Lock On is set to Auto-Cast.
You can no longer reveal a Stasis Ward by using an Overlords “Generate Creep” ability.
The Lurker Den is no longer missing from the Zerg Structures Hotkeys Menu.
The Battlecruiser animation on the home screen will no longer disappear if you are idle.
The Disruptor's Purification Nova explosion effect is no longer faint on Low graphic settings.
On May 28 2015 03:21 adymus wrote: This patch brings a brand new unit to the Terran army, a chat system rework and a bevy of bug fixes to the Legacy of the Void beta. Please note that the patch is being distrubted throughout the day and may not be available in your region yet. Find a full list of them in the patch notes below:
Social
Chat System The old StarCraft II Chat System has been removed and a new embedded chat dialogue has been added. Type /help into chat for a full list of commands. Friends List The Friends List has been given a slight visual refresh and should feel more responsive. Players Near You has been moved from the Home Screen into the Friends List. General
Gas geysers now contain 2000 gas.
Terran
New Unit: Liberator Mechanical Air Unit Fires 2 missiles that deal 7 splash damage to air units. Can be deployed to attack ground units, losing mobility and anti-air attack. While deployed, the Liberator attacks any ground units in the target zone for 85 damage. Single target damage. Cannot attack buildings while deployed. Vehicle and Ship Weapon upgrades have been separated again. Adjusted building subgroup priorities to the following: Command Center > Planetary Fortress Barracks > Factory > Starport Engineering Bay > Armory
Zerg
Corruptor Reverted ability to Corruption but now can be auto-cast. Swarm Hosts Can no longer move while burrowed. Roaches Burrow movement once again needs to be researched. Adjusted building subgroup priorities to the following: Hatchery > Lair > Hive Evolutionary Chamber > Spire > Greater Spire Hydralisk Den > Lurker Den
Protoss
Adjusted building subgroup priorities to the following: Gateway > Robotics > Stargate
Bug Fixes
The Raven ready sound no longer plays when a Cyclone is created. Fixed an issue that caused a newly morphed Ravager to glide on the ground. Neural Parasite will no longer persist through Oracle’s Stasis Trap. A unit can no longer be targeted with Graviton Beam while are under the effect of knock-back. Fixed an issue that caused units to attack destructible doodads they were railed to. Siege Tanks in siege mode should no longer become covered by creep when moved by a Medivac. Fixed an issue that prevented unburrowed Swarm Hosts from spawning locusts when selected in a group with burrowed Swarm Hosts. Locusts should now correctly have a life duration of 25. Adepts can no longer phase into buildings under construction. Lurker attacks should no longer be visible through the Fog of War. Fixed an issue that caused the Adept to glide if issued a move command immediately after using Psionic Transfer. Caustic Spray and Parasitic Bomb will now properly trigger an “Under Attack” alert. Adjusting the viewing speed of a replay should no longer cause the timestamp to jump around. The Hellbat's attack will now correctly appear blue with the Infernal Pre-Igniters upgrade. The “Activate Stasis Trap” hotkey is now available for customization. Cyclones will no longer automatically target disguised changelings when Lock On is set to Auto-Cast. You can no longer reveal a Stasis Ward by using an Overlords “Generate Creep” ability. The Lurker Den is no longer missing from the Zerg Structures Hotkeys Menu. The Battlecruiser animation on the home screen will no longer disappear if you are idle. The Disruptor's Purification Nova explosion effect is no longer faint on Low graphic settings.
Just to help out here is the link also everyone who wants to view it on battle net as well
On May 28 2015 03:32 Tuczniak wrote: Autocast on corruption will be so interesting. Gj.
Will it? :D I now understand the whiners, maybe am even becoming part of them, it feels like it's slowly reverting back to HotS with a few new units here and there :D All that is left is for D.Kim to decide to replace the mineral distributions with something "smooth" like 100/90.
I'm definetely on the team of dissapointment, i remember the start of LOTV seemed like so many fun changes might be possible. (for example DPS nerf - here HP increase across all units would have been nicer as to not mess with stutter step micro and other micro interactions) Herc fun new unit.
And now its becoming more and more hots with 1 or 2 new units :S ugh come on blizzard blow me away with massive changes please /o\
On May 28 2015 04:26 Quateras wrote:And now its becoming more and more hots with 1 or 2 new units :S ugh come on blizzard blow me away with massive changes please /o\
There won't be massive changes. At this point, Blizz is in the state of fine tuning the stats of units and that's all there is to come for LotV. A few people just need some more months of beta to realize this.
On May 28 2015 04:26 Quateras wrote:And now its becoming more and more hots with 1 or 2 new units :S ugh come on blizzard blow me away with massive changes please /o\
There won't be massive changes. At this point, Blizz is in the state of fine tuning the stats of units and that's all there is to come for LotV. A few people just need some more months of beta to realize this.
I would make a joke about the design of a certain race, but I'm not sure how conducive to a good conversation that would be.
We fans need to believe in a miracle. Maybe there is some beauty and kindness in the world.
On May 28 2015 04:26 Quateras wrote:And now its becoming more and more hots with 1 or 2 new units :S ugh come on blizzard blow me away with massive changes please /o\
There won't be massive changes. At this point, Blizz is in the state of fine tuning the stats of units and that's all there is to come for LotV. A few people just need some more months of beta to realize this.
Yep. LotV: A Glorified Patch
Good bug fixes, but these are very minor and should not have taken so long. Blizzard does not seem to understand that design comes before balance. I am sure the remaining people working on SC2 have been put on Heroes since its release is a week away.
On May 28 2015 03:32 Tuczniak wrote: Autocast on corruption will be so interesting. Gj.
Will it? :D I now understand the whiners, maybe am even becoming part of them, it feels like it's slowly reverting back to HotS with a few new units here and there :D All that is left is for D.Kim to decide to replace the mineral distributions with something "smooth" like 100/90.
I didn't care and buy HotS, and if LotV will not be a noticeable different game I will not get that as well. Eh, I guess I will play Starbow instead.
Every patch since the start of LotV beta has been a lackluster. Blizzard usually address the right problems, but they approach them in completely wrong way. Plus we are getting closer and closer to HotS. With recent SH change it makes me think SC2 future is far from bright with current team working on it.
Corruptor Reverted ability to Corruption but now can be auto-cast.
So Blizzard wants an even easier game? They do it wrong. We don't need an easier game, we need a more enjoyable gameplay.
On May 28 2015 04:42 Tuczniak wrote: Every patch since the start of LotV beta has been a lackluster. Blizzard usually address the right problems, but they approach them in completely wrong way. Plus we are getting closer and closer to HotS. With recent SH change it makes me think SC2 future is far from bright with current team working on it.
The community has complained about David Kim and Dustin Browder for years.
Is there sufficient design space for Terran to have both a Viking and the Liberator? They're both primarily air-to-air combat units and have a separate mode for ground-based combat.
Pretty typical, start out with making big changes, and slowly revert them to what we started with. At least they seem pretty intent on killing the colossus.
I don't think it is fair to criticize Blizzard for reverting changes they introduced in LotV. They are doing what we wanted, trying shit out. We should criticize them for what they are not trying out.
On May 28 2015 04:50 dust7 wrote: I don't think it is fair to criticize Blizzard for reverting changes they introduced in LotV. They are doing what we wanted, trying shit out. We should criticize them for what they are not trying out.
I wouldn't criticize them if they were replacing new stuff with other new stuff, they're not. We're simply headed back to HoTS, not in a new direction.
We’re seeing certain strategies with the Oracle’s Stasis ability where players are stacking the ability several times, and then manually detonating them over time to indefinitely leave units in Stasis. With our focus on constant combat, this is obviously something that we have no desire for and this change should effectively end this behavior.
I don't understand.
Edit: I guess by "Activate Stasis Trap" they mean casting it, this would be a way to make sense of it, but it would be worded very awkwardly.
I'm glad blizzard isn't interested in actually making the game fun for zerg. I disliked the corrupter upgrade, I'm glad its gone. However, with the new locust timer... and the fact that they're really only used for harassment... I don't see the point as to why burrow movement was removed. I guess for terran, it wouldn't be easy to spot...
Making roach burrow movement a required upgrade was also a nice idea. That band-aid was rather fuckin pointless.
However, I can tell the continued issues that should be looked at: The stupid strong ultralisk (which I like for biased reasons) will be dealt with.
Idk what's up with that liberator unit. So far, the concept itself seems cool. However... as to its purpose.. and how to defend vs that purpose is up in the air
On May 28 2015 04:50 dust7 wrote: I don't think it is fair to criticize Blizzard for reverting changes they introduced in LotV. They are doing what we wanted, trying shit out. We should criticize them for what they are not trying out.
I wouldn't criticize them if they were replacing new stuff with other new stuff, they're not. We're simply headed back to HoTS, not in a new direction.
Yeah, you are doing what I suggested. You don't criticize Blizzard on the notion that taking something back is inherently bad, but for not showing any interest in trying anything substantial. They are so timid it hurts.
On May 28 2015 04:26 Quateras wrote:And now its becoming more and more hots with 1 or 2 new units :S ugh come on blizzard blow me away with massive changes please /o\
There won't be massive changes. At this point, Blizz is in the state of fine tuning the stats of units and that's all there is to come for LotV. A few people just need some more months of beta to realize this.
As somebody mentioned in the thread before, it really seems like are happy with lotv and start making final tweaks. Thats disappointing.. no actually thats a slap in the face to every Sc2 fan who follows this game with much passion and would love to see this game beeing even more awesome thant it already is. There is much room for improvement, so much good ideas, but all we can do is accept and get over it.
To contribute anything to this patch; i am let´s say curious if the liberator fits to the game.
On May 28 2015 04:26 Quateras wrote:And now its becoming more and more hots with 1 or 2 new units :S ugh come on blizzard blow me away with massive changes please /o\
There won't be massive changes. At this point, Blizz is in the state of fine tuning the stats of units and that's all there is to come for LotV. A few people just need some more months of beta to realize this.
As somebody mentioned in the thread before, it really seems like are happy with lotv and start making final tweaks. Thats disappointing.. no actually thats a slap in the face to every Sc2 fan who follows this game with much passion and would love to see this game beeing even more awesome thant it already is. There is much room for improvement, so much good ideas, but all we can do is accept and get over it.
To contribute anything to this patch; i am let´s say curious if the liberator fits to the game.
It was a slap in the face as soon as Blizzard said SC2 will be done into 3 instalments - terran, zerg and protoss. You may say it's in favour of better campaign but what it is really is more money for Blizzard with mediocre expansions.
I still play SC2 but only because I was a Brood War player before, so it's more of a habit for me than just SC2.
Edit: When I ask new players why they don't enjoy SC2, the complaints are usually either (a) Blizzard nerfed their favourite style or (b) there is one way to play a match-up such as PvT that it gets boring. For example, terran has had to do bio since 2010. 5 years of the same style all over again and again.
It's depressing they promised us big changes but gave us things they've done in the past. For the love of everything try out Lalushs suggestions on depth of micro. Heart of the Swarm has around 40k people in diamond + across all regions Teamliquid probably has about 20k active accounts (actively reading checking posting) and I would wager that 60-70% are in that top 20%. It should be a fair assumption that the majority of people playing Lotv (massively less than the amount invited) have knowledge of teamliquid or are active on it. LoTv is a sandbox and we are there to test, we want big changes that will heighten the skill and only make the game more responsive enjoyable and actively played.
Someone said on Teamliquid awhile ago that a good competitive game doesn't have to look pretty or be interesting it just has has to be predictable and responsive. Balancing the game can happen when it's released this is a beta the people playing it understand it's a beta and actively want big changes.
Poll: What change do you want the most out of LotV
(Vote): Responsive/Rewarding Micro (Vote): New units (Vote): A well written Campaign (Vote): Better chat system (Vote): Updated Graphics (Vote): Transparent/Better MMR System (Vote): More spaced out leagues (Diamond 1,2,3) (Vote): Other
Poll: What change do you want the most out of LotV
(Vote): Responsive/Rewarding Micro (Vote): New units (Vote): A well written Campaign (Vote): Better chat system (Vote): Updated Graphics (Vote): Transparent/Better MMR System (Vote): More spaced out leagues (Diamond 1,2,3) (Vote): Other
[x] other
redesign of major game aspects, such as warpgate, the economy, space control for terran mech in the form of tanks, etc.
also be cautious to vote for better micro. this will make blizzard introduce more activated abilities.
I dont particularly like most of these changes but I understand them. Taking burrow move away from roaches that early makes sense if they're readding the engineering bay requirements to turrets. Still not sold on the new unit and wish these small tweaks were HotS patches instead of LotV patches and they used void patches for new and more drastic things.
So, now that all the new units are apparently in, can we get some real changes please? LETS EXPERIMENT BLIZZARD. DONT GO BACK ON YOUR PROMISE SO QUICKLY GODDAMN IT THIS ISNT WHAT WAS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN.
Where are the economic changes? Warp Gate changes? Big unit redesigns? Damage point changes? Why are we fine tuning shit when there's bigger fish to fry right now?
On May 28 2015 04:54 doihy wrote: Blizzard : "Here's some new toys to play with! now don't bother me while we work on real projects like hearthstone and heroes of the storm!"
No fucking kidding, this is getting more and more blatant every single day.
Corruptor Reverted ability to Corruption but now can be auto-cast.
Oh, interesting, I wonder if Blizzard read this post of mine:
On May 16 2015 05:46 Grumbels wrote: In Warcraft 3 you had specific hotkeys for each of your heroes, many abilities could be auto-casted and with limited unit selection you were forced to create separate control groups already. And fights would last longer so you had more time to cast the spells. In contrast, some of the concerns with active abilities in Starcraft 2 are related to the interface and specifically the tabbing system. You have the power to select your entire army with one convenient hotkey, but to actually use those abilities you have to go through a cumbersome process of tabbing just the right number of times.
There are other RTS games where all hotkeys are global, that is to say that if you hit "G" you might always activate guardian shield for all sentries in your control group. Of course this can't be simply adapted to Starcraft 2 but it's an example of an approach that acknowledges the fact that abilities can contribute positively to the game and that tries to make them accessible to players. There are also abilities that could be given auto-cast, like the void ray's prismatic alignment. You can still activate manually for correct usage, but you wouldn't have to stress out during fights because you had to cycle through all your abilities quickly.
These are examples of ideas that Blizzard could employ to allow users to better navigate through a game infested with abilities. Because adding abilities comes at a cost of requiring ability upkeep in battles, which starts to drown out real micro.
I'm actually in favor of adding auto-cast to the game to make abilities more manageable. I didn't mention corruption in my post because the ability didn't exist at the time, but alongside prismatic alignment it's a prime candidate for an auto-cast feature.
I love to read bug fixes. Some of them must have been discovered in funny situations^^
The Hellbat's attack will now correctly appear blue with the Infernal Pre-Igniters upgrade.
XD The liberator is a very dangerous idea but beta let's go for it we'll see ( i dont think it'll work ) Unfortunately, once again some weird stuffs
Reverted ability to Corruption but now can be auto-cast.
Make a choice, ability or no ability, not half . An autocast abiliy make no sense in a "starcraft" game.
I am glad Blizzard strat focusing a bit on social tools, a friendlist with at least one tier, tournament management and the simple main chan are the minimun so we can have a community not communities.
I hate all those abilities. I want units that have cool movement and get better when they are microed properly. Like marines, lings, stalkers, phoenix... If I wanted to play whack-an-ability, I'd play another game. Well, as a zerg player I'm still kind of lucky. I tried playing protoss in the beta and it felt like I was playing Warcraft in space. :/
On May 16 2015 05:46 Grumbels wrote: In Warcraft 3 you had specific hotkeys for each of your heroes, many abilities could be auto-casted and with limited unit selection you were forced to create separate control groups already. And fights would last longer so you had more time to cast the spells. In contrast, some of the concerns with active abilities in Starcraft 2 are related to the interface and specifically the tabbing system. You have the power to select your entire army with one convenient hotkey, but to actually use those abilities you have to go through a cumbersome process of tabbing just the right number of times.
There are other RTS games where all hotkeys are global, that is to say that if you hit "G" you might always activate guardian shield for all sentries in your control group. Of course this can't be simply adapted to Starcraft 2 but it's an example of an approach that acknowledges the fact that abilities can contribute positively to the game and that tries to make them accessible to players. There are also abilities that could be given auto-cast, like the void ray's prismatic alignment. You can still activate manually for correct usage, but you wouldn't have to stress out during fights because you had to cycle through all your abilities quickly.
These are examples of ideas that Blizzard could employ to allow users to better navigate through a game infested with abilities. Because adding abilities comes at a cost of requiring ability upkeep in battles, which starts to drown out real micro.
I'm actually in favor of adding auto-cast to the game to make abilities more manageable. I didn't mention corruption in my post because the ability didn't exist at the time, but alongside prismatic alignment it's a prime candidate for an auto-cast feature.
Why not just buff the units core stat. I don't really see how it has different implications here.
On May 28 2015 05:47 virpi wrote: I hate all those abilities. I want units that have cool movement and get better when they are microed properly. Like marines, lings, stalkers, phoenix... If I wanted to play whack-an-ability, I'd play another game. Well, as a zerg player I'm still kind of lucky. I tried playing protoss in the beta and it felt like I was playing Warcraft in space. :/
Reverted ability to Corruption but now can be auto-cast.
Make a choice, ability or no ability, not half . An autocast abiliy make no sense in a "starcraft" game.
The difference between an auto-casted ability and an attack is partly just semantics. Medivac/medic heal and baneling explode are equal part auto-cast abilities and attack. An auto-casted corruption is not that dissimilar from a passive effect on the corruption attack. Auto-cast makes some ability designs available that could be otherwise too troublesome to use.
I'm not playing the beta again until they fix the minimap. Getting my mineral line cleared by disruptor drop's because I can't see the minimap and react is dumb.
I would rather have turrets available to be built after barracks to get rid of coin flip TvP than have the Liberator in the game. That's how bad of a change it is to not allow Terran to have defense against proxy oracles.
So, anyone else wondering how that eco testing is going? DH9/DH10 any1? All my expectations are pretty much gone for LOTV =/
On May 28 2015 06:25 avilo wrote: I would rather have turrets available to be built after barracks to get rid of coin flip TvP than have the Liberator in the game. That's how bad of a change it is to not allow Terran to have defense against proxy oracles.
So, anyone else wondering how that eco testing is going? DH9/DH10 any1? All my expectations are pretty much gone for LOTV =/
The Econ testing seems to be done man. half mineral fields at 60% seems to be their desired changed.
At this point all they are doing are pretty much polishing the game (getting rid of bugs). Ultimately is their game and seems they are happy with it, like it or not.
No more reaper expo into 3 rax or reaper expo into WM drop in TvP. We'll gona try other opener with this (cyclone first, drop tank) without be hard counter by a (proxy) stargate opener.
The game changes are pretty meh, I'd like to try alternatives rather than tweaks.
The Liberator worries me, Protoss is fairly dependent on Stargate units (carrier=new colossus imo) and this Liberator concept looks like a very sharp counter to all things air.
Might be a really good thing though, Terran (whisper it) feels a little weak to me.
So the Liberator is essentially the Valkyrie but it can also shoot ground if it wants to. Blizzard keeps making units that are basically BW copies almost, it seems like :\
On May 28 2015 06:32 TT1 wrote: how are you supposed to counter the liberator? it has insane range vs ground and destroys air units
7 range and 3 second transformation means that you should have enough time to move out of the circle to avoid damage.
TBH I don't expect the liberator to make skyterran a viable composition in its own, they are trying too hard but balancing air units vs ground has always been tricky I don't even understand what purpose this unit fullfils with its AtG attack.
On May 28 2015 06:33 nesmah wrote: GOD !
They kept the turret available with the rax !!!
This is fu&#ing great !
No more reaper expo into 3 rax or reaper expo into WM drop in TvP. We'll gona try other opener with this (cyclone first, drop tank) without be hard counter by a (proxy) stargate opener.
Thx blizz.
No they didn't turrets requires e-bay again (they fucked up in the blog but you should fing it if you look again)
Poll: What change do you want the most out of LotV
(Vote): Responsive/Rewarding Micro (Vote): New units (Vote): A well written Campaign (Vote): Better chat system (Vote): Updated Graphics (Vote): Transparent/Better MMR System (Vote): More spaced out leagues (Diamond 1,2,3) (Vote): Other
[x] other
redesign of major game aspects, such as warpgate, the economy, space control for terran mech in the form of tanks, etc.
also be cautious to vote for better micro. this will make blizzard introduce more activated abilities.
I'm confident that they can read that it's changes like Lalush depth of micro, he in that video even listed ways they could do it without it requiring new code just changing numbers.
On May 28 2015 06:41 RoomOfMush wrote: Whats with all the pitch forks and torches? I dont understand how you people can repeat the same negative feedback in every. Single. Thread.
We'll stop giving negetive feedback when what we say in our feedback starts being addressed
On May 28 2015 06:41 RoomOfMush wrote: Whats with all the pitch forks and torches? I dont understand how you people can repeat the same negative feedback in every. Single. Thread.
This is the last Starcraft for years, no other company will make a RTS so all us RTS players are quite worried we want it to be perfect. And what SGTK said.
On May 28 2015 06:32 TT1 wrote: how are you supposed to counter the liberator? it has insane range vs ground and destroys air units
7 range and 3 second transformation means that you should have enough time to move out of the circle to avoid damage.
TBH I don't expect the liberator to make skyterran a viable composition in its own, they are trying too hard but balancing air units vs ground has always been tricky I don't even understand what purpose this unit fullfils with its AtG attack.
No more reaper expo into 3 rax or reaper expo into WM drop in TvP. We'll gona try other opener with this (cyclone first, drop tank) without be hard counter by a (proxy) stargate opener.
Thx blizz.
No they didn't turrets requires e-bay again (they fucked up in the blog but you should fing it if you look again)
No. I can't see any word on this. I looked again the official topic,and there is no mention to this.
On May 28 2015 06:32 TT1 wrote: how are you supposed to counter the liberator? it has insane range vs ground and destroys air units
7 range and 3 second transformation means that you should have enough time to move out of the circle to avoid damage.
TBH I don't expect the liberator to make skyterran a viable composition in its own, they are trying too hard but balancing air units vs ground has always been tricky I don't even understand what purpose this unit fullfils with its AtG attack.
On May 28 2015 06:33 nesmah wrote: GOD !
They kept the turret available with the rax !!!
This is fu&#ing great !
No more reaper expo into 3 rax or reaper expo into WM drop in TvP. We'll gona try other opener with this (cyclone first, drop tank) without be hard counter by a (proxy) stargate opener.
Thx blizz.
No they didn't turrets requires e-bay again (they fucked up in the blog but you should fing it if you look again)
No. I can't see any word on this. I looked again the official topic,and there is no mention to this.
On May 28 2015 06:41 RoomOfMush wrote: Whats with all the pitch forks and torches? I dont understand how you people can repeat the same negative feedback in every. Single. Thread.
We'll stop giving negetive feedback when what we say in our feedback starts being addressed
You know perfectly well that this will never happen. It never happened in the past and it is not going to happen in the future. You have to find other ways to deal with your disappointment.
On May 28 2015 06:41 RoomOfMush wrote: Whats with all the pitch forks and torches? I dont understand how you people can repeat the same negative feedback in every. Single. Thread.
This is the last Starcraft for years, no other company will make a RTS so all us RTS players are quite worried we want it to be perfect. And what SGTK said.
No other company will make an RTS? How do you know? There are plenty of RTS games out there, but perhaps it is you who does not want to try anything new. Furthermore, Blizzard has already shown, that they are not capable of making a "perfect RTS game" time and time again. Do you really believe that crying on the internet is magically going to make them the greatest RTS developers of all time?
Corruptor Reverted ability to Corruption but now can be auto-cast.
Oh, interesting, I wonder if Blizzard read this post of mine:
On May 16 2015 05:46 Grumbels wrote: In Warcraft 3 you had specific hotkeys for each of your heroes, many abilities could be auto-casted and with limited unit selection you were forced to create separate control groups already. And fights would last longer so you had more time to cast the spells. In contrast, some of the concerns with active abilities in Starcraft 2 are related to the interface and specifically the tabbing system. You have the power to select your entire army with one convenient hotkey, but to actually use those abilities you have to go through a cumbersome process of tabbing just the right number of times.
There are other RTS games where all hotkeys are global, that is to say that if you hit "G" you might always activate guardian shield for all sentries in your control group. Of course this can't be simply adapted to Starcraft 2 but it's an example of an approach that acknowledges the fact that abilities can contribute positively to the game and that tries to make them accessible to players. There are also abilities that could be given auto-cast, like the void ray's prismatic alignment. You can still activate manually for correct usage, but you wouldn't have to stress out during fights because you had to cycle through all your abilities quickly.
These are examples of ideas that Blizzard could employ to allow users to better navigate through a game infested with abilities. Because adding abilities comes at a cost of requiring ability upkeep in battles, which starts to drown out real micro.
I'm actually in favor of adding auto-cast to the game to make abilities more manageable. I didn't mention corruption in my post because the ability didn't exist at the time, but alongside prismatic alignment it's a prime candidate for an auto-cast feature.
Why not just buff the units core stat. I don't really see how it has different implications here.
Well, you can make a case against auto-cast. First of all let's establish that any sort of auto-attack can not be considered an auto-cast. Let's expand this category to also include things like auto-heals (medic, repair) and the baneling explosion, which aren't really abilities in the conceptual sense. At this point we're left with abilities that require some cost in either cooldown or energy and which might therefore be considered to involve decision making. This precludes auto-cast being a reasonable addition, because auto-cast implies some sort of functional targeting AI, which would seem to defeat the strategical nature of the ability. In that sense having auto-casted abilities is a paradox.
But I don't think that's necessarily true, because there exists a gray area between auto-attacks and major spells. Abilities that are "spammy", that you are supposed to use at leisure, but which still benefit from manual targeting (and which would allow you to actually use the ability in larger fights). Corruption is exactly like that, the ability might not be very inspiring but if it exists in the game it should have auto-cast. Maybe you can achieve the same effect with core stats changes, which might be appropriate in this specific case, but I just don't see how one could consider auto-cast to be a priori a bad thing.
I think it would be good to experiment with making more abilities auto-cast, just to see how it works out. For instance, if you attack-move with phoenixes, why shouldn't you be able to set graviton beam on auto-cast instead of manually targeting every drone which is just pointless busy work?
I was actually thinking about the interface issue of auto-cast. Because if it depends on individual player preferences to have autocast on or off it's obnoxious to constantly have to disable autocast for corruption with every new corruptor that you add to your army. What if you could do scan-moves with corruption? It would be like attack-move, but the corruptor would also try to corrupt enemy targets, but only if it received the command. It could be like alt-click on an ability and then target ground etc.
@Miriel: @Miriel: So there was some miscommunication on what was included in this patch and currently Corruptors should still have Caustic Spray. The patch notes have been edited to reflect this.
Oh nevermind, the corruptors weren't changed and don't have corruption and still have caustic spray.
I'm kind of disappointed that it's just an radius splash effect. I was hoping for a line or a cone. They already have a Thor which has a radius splash effect. Just makes it less interesting.
I assume they will tone down the damage vs ground because that looks rather silly. I wouldn't trust the trailer, units are always crazy in the trailer.
On May 28 2015 06:41 RoomOfMush wrote: Whats with all the pitch forks and torches? I dont understand how you people can repeat the same negative feedback in every. Single. Thread.
We'll stop giving negetive feedback when what we say in our feedback starts being addressed
You know perfectly well that this will never happen. It never happened in the past and it is not going to happen in the future. You have to find other ways to deal with your disappointment.
On May 28 2015 06:41 RoomOfMush wrote: Whats with all the pitch forks and torches? I dont understand how you people can repeat the same negative feedback in every. Single. Thread.
This is the last Starcraft for years, no other company will make a RTS so all us RTS players are quite worried we want it to be perfect. And what SGTK said.
No other company will make an RTS? How do you know? There are plenty of RTS games out there, but perhaps it is you who does not want to try anything new. Furthermore, Blizzard has already shown, that they are not capable of making a "perfect RTS game" time and time again. Do you really believe that crying on the internet is magically going to make them the greatest RTS developers of all time?
RTS development is a long trail of blood and tears for most studios, unless you expect a company like petroglyph or uber to make the next defining rts your shit out of luck.
I don't quite understand Blizzard's intention to make Starport an autonomous tech path. They have no reliable air-to-ground units and starports are expensive infrastructure, especially since you need a tech lab for almost everything useful. Starting upgrades will be very late too. Terran already has the bio vs mech division, now it will be bio vs mech vs sky? Meanwhile none of the other races function like this, and I'm fairly certain sky terran will never exist as Blizzard envisioned it unless they make it really strong and force you to eventually transition into this for the late-game. But then it still won't exist for the early and mid-game.
On May 28 2015 06:22 Feisty wrote: I'm not playing the beta again until they fix the minimap. Getting my mineral line cleared by disruptor drop's because I can't see the minimap and react is dumb.
"Mini-map: Units and buildings on the mini-map have a black border around them once again." Enjoy the beta!
On May 28 2015 06:41 RoomOfMush wrote: Whats with all the pitch forks and torches? I dont understand how you people can repeat the same negative feedback in every. Single. Thread.
We'll stop giving negetive feedback when what we say in our feedback starts being addressed
Literally impossible. No matter what Blizzard does, people bitch and moan about it until their fucking fingers fall off.
On May 28 2015 08:00 FrostedMiniWheats wrote: Even the Liberator's video is lame :/
Yeah all the units were just standing and shooting, it didn't look fun or exciting at all ._.
You guys realise its just a demonstration what to expect from this Unit? If you want to see it in real battles go play the beta (if you have it).
Looks interesting. Patch notes and the video. The only thing I dislike is how there is yet another option for Bio to counter Siege Tanks. As if Medivacs and Marauders aren´t enough (or are Marauders not that strong vs Tanks anymore with the new attack) ? But I guess the situation looks different if there are some Vikings involved. But the battle vs Protss Armies were nice. Looks like you don´t Vikings that much anymore.
On May 28 2015 06:41 RoomOfMush wrote: Whats with all the pitch forks and torches? I dont understand how you people can repeat the same negative feedback in every. Single. Thread.
You should adopt my policy.
Post a bit long? Ctrl f.
COUNTER PLAY
DESIGN
CONTRACTION OF TIME
BROODWAR
UNIT INTERACTIONS
If one of these words is present, you know the post isnt worth your time.
I still find it hilarious as hell that every new unit has been about adding back an old bw unit. WoL was this huge change! They removed or reworked all these units into something new, basically saying "we aren't going to just redo bw with better graphics!"
Then hots came out and it was like "okay so maybe we needed firebats, mines, devourer, lurkers, and the goliath?"
Now lotv is coming and they're like "Uh crap. Okay okay so maybe we also needed Valkyries and Scarabs too? And it really looks like we should have just added the real Lurker last game too.. Man that Warhound Goliath thing didn't work out last time. Let's do that again, better this time."
But it's cool! We have three totally new unit in the form of the Swarm Host, Oracle, and Tempest! All units most people hate. And now we get the Adept and Ravager too. We see how those work out.
As for the changes.. I dunno. I feel like blizzard is about as done with SC as most of us are? I feel like for Zerg they could have done more with burrow, not just make it easier to obtain. I don't mind them reverting mech and air upgrades, though I hate the Turret reversion. There are enough high tier harass options that making it Barracks requirement wouldn't be changing too much in the way of early game harass. Overall I think Terran will get a massive change since too many units overlap, Zerg kind of has nothing now, and Protoss still seems too finicky.
We'll see what happens. Also the liberator looks stupid. They could have rally done more with the design, especially the the transformation. Maybe it has a cockpit and when it changes to ag mode the front splits, and the cockpit lowers onto the guns or something? If they're gonna push the transformation stuff, do it cool at least.
I like the new unit. Not everything needs to be fast and require micro to be exciting. Liberator could help diverse the Terran gameplay a bit and make transitions from bio to sky terran easier without the need of many factory units since it could be used as a flying siege tank.
Still waiting for that beta access though so i'm not sure about the state of the beta, maybe all the people complaining are right.
On May 28 2015 08:00 FrostedMiniWheats wrote: Even the Liberator's video is lame :/
Yeah all the units were just standing and shooting, it didn't look fun or exciting at all ._.
You guys realise its just a demonstration what to expect from this Unit? If you want to see it in real battles go play the beta (if you have it).
Looks interesting. Patch notes and the video. The only thing I dislike is how there is yet another option for Bio to counter Siege Tanks. As if Medivacs and Marauders aren´t enough (or are Marauders not that strong vs Tanks anymore with the new attack) ? But I guess the situation looks different if there are some Vikings involved. But the battle vs Protss Armies were nice. Looks like you don´t Vikings that much anymore.
I really wanna play the Beta.
From the liberator video, the battle versus the Protoss army only looked nice because the Protoss army walked into a Terran defensive concave while the liberators were given time to siege. Realistically, the liberators would've been torn from the sky the moment the engagement happened. Offensively, the liberators would've died before they would have a chance to siege.
At least, that's what would happen with a colossi-based army. I wonder if it'll be a good viking-ghost intermediary should the Protoss transition from colossi to storm.
On May 28 2015 08:00 FrostedMiniWheats wrote: Even the Liberator's video is lame :/
Yeah all the units were just standing and shooting, it didn't look fun or exciting at all ._.
You guys realise its just a demonstration what to expect from this Unit? If you want to see it in real battles go play the beta (if you have it).
Looks interesting. Patch notes and the video. The only thing I dislike is how there is yet another option for Bio to counter Siege Tanks. As if Medivacs and Marauders aren´t enough (or are Marauders not that strong vs Tanks anymore with the new attack) ? But I guess the situation looks different if there are some Vikings involved. But the battle vs Protss Armies were nice. Looks like you don´t Vikings that much anymore.
I really wanna play the Beta.
From the liberator video, the battle versus the Protoss army only looked nice because the Protoss army walked into a Terran defensive concave while the liberators were given time to siege. Realistically, the liberators would've been torn from the sky the moment the engagement happened. Offensively, the liberators would've died before they would have a chance to siege.
At least, that's what would happen with a colossi-based army. I wonder if it'll be a good viking-ghost intermediary should the Protoss transition from colossi to storm.
Yeah thats the problem, this unit is a lot like the disruptor in the fact that either the enemy walks into the are and does amazing damage or it just walks around the huge red dot and does jackshit, theres one diference tho you can atleast control a disruptor and pick it up with a warp prism, the only thing you can do with this is transform it back and forth.
Now I'm not against siege unit, I know how siege unit works, the thing is siege units are made aroun space control and terrain, this is just like the tempest another flying unit that shouldn't be like that.
I don't care wheter is OP or not that can be balance, the thing is that I don't see it something actually good for gameplay, I kinda (just kinda) see why Blizzard gave the AtG since they want stargate to be a viable tech tree in its own, its just that I don't think this was the better way to go about it (or if even having each building a composition in itself its actually a good idea but thats another story)
chatsystem is such bullshit, so many features cut away for that chatsystem... no more own groupchat and clan chat,, super small window, not able to show off your portrait not able to see the ranking border, not able to join other ppl game, this new chat system belongs to a mmo game..
group/clan news and info are gone?!
should have just added autojoin to the general chat, i think blizzard is drunk
Question about the chat for people who can into beta, is there any way to set text size? Cause as someone with kind of poor eyesight that's always been a huge gripe of mine.
On May 28 2015 09:16 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Question about the chat for people who can into beta, is there any way to set text size? Cause as someone with kind of poor eyesight that's always been a huge gripe of mine.
You can't in heroes iirc, so chances are you can't in LotV beta atm
The Liberator is really cool and the ground attack seems well-designed. Kudos to Blizzard to adding more area control and staying true to Terran roots with it.
That said they still need to fix the actual game. Remove terribly designed crap like warpgate/tempests and rework Protoss, rework things so big battles don't end in 4 seconds, and increase the skillcap of the overall game so it's not so easy anymore, and so on.
I'd also like it if they change the scale of the game so the buildings aren't so small compared to units. Looks wacky.
On May 28 2015 08:00 FrostedMiniWheats wrote: Even the Liberator's video is lame :/
Yeah all the units were just standing and shooting, it didn't look fun or exciting at all ._.
You guys realise its just a demonstration what to expect from this Unit? If you want to see it in real battles go play the beta (if you have it).
Looks interesting. Patch notes and the video. The only thing I dislike is how there is yet another option for Bio to counter Siege Tanks. As if Medivacs and Marauders aren´t enough (or are Marauders not that strong vs Tanks anymore with the new attack) ? But I guess the situation looks different if there are some Vikings involved. But the battle vs Protss Armies were nice. Looks like you don´t Vikings that much anymore.
I really wanna play the Beta.
From the liberator video, the battle versus the Protoss army only looked nice because the Protoss army walked into a Terran defensive concave while the liberators were given time to siege. Realistically, the liberators would've been torn from the sky the moment the engagement happened. Offensively, the liberators would've died before they would have a chance to siege.
At least, that's what would happen with a colossi-based army. I wonder if it'll be a good viking-ghost intermediary should the Protoss transition from colossi to storm.
The bolded part is exactly why this is nice. I can´t count how many times I have seen, in my games as well as others Protoss steamrolling a Terran Mech Army.
Oh and Iam watching Nathanias´ Stream cause I wanted to see this Unit in action and... JESUS TAPDANCING CHRIST can this guy please stop complaining? He is really doing the avilo right now. He didn´t even read the patchnotes. First thing he says when trying the Liberator: " Wait they can´t attack Structures?" Then he is constantly complaing about it while not even having tested it really. All I hear is: "Liberator sucks, Liberator sucks" etc sometimes a "Useless in TvX" thrown in. Well maybe you should experiment some more and not play Standard stuff, this is a Beta after all.
This constant negativity in general has to stop. I get that people want to get the best RTS experience since this is pretty much the only RTS at the moment and the last SC 2 game and people want to give Feedback. But constant negative feedback is not going to help.
I think the Liberator will have its role and I think the demo video showed some good situations
I apologize for that bit of rant against Nathanias. I hope this does not count as caster bashing. It just makes me a bit upset that not even casters that are Masters are willing to test out stuff and experiment with the new implementations.
On May 28 2015 06:25 avilo wrote: I would rather have turrets available to be built after barracks to get rid of coin flip TvP than have the Liberator in the game. That's how bad of a change it is to not allow Terran to have defense against proxy oracles.
So, anyone else wondering how that eco testing is going? DH9/DH10 any1? All my expectations are pretty much gone for LOTV =/
The Econ testing seems to be done man. half mineral fields at 60% seems to be their desired changed.
I AGREE! I AGREE WITH AVILO!
I'm also a zerg... Loved it when the evo requirement was dropped for spores. At first I was resistant to the idea of terran being able to build turrets in the same way, but really I couldn't find a good argument against it. They should drop the engi requirement, aka fuck dts.
I LOVED the initial economy change, it remains my favorite change in the game throughout the life of sc2. I really hope blizzard continues to make BIG changes the to the game and economy. I also love TL's commitment to working the DH model, which makes so much sense to me (from what I have read).
I hope they are just distracted with the heroes release for the time being, could be things will ramp up after.
I'm all for putting the turret back at the engy bay, but honestly I think they need to give the cyclone back the default shoot up ability with the change. Killing builds that don't get fast 6-12 marines is super dumb. TvP opening in hots have been so boring on the Terran side, let it get mixed up. Not to mention adepts are actually a lot better than protoss players thought they were and are super great against marines!
On May 28 2015 09:34 Tresher wrote: This constant negativity in general has to stop. I get that people want to get the best RTS experience since this is pretty much the only RTS at the moment and the last SC 2 game and people want to give Feedback. But constant negative feedback is not going to help.
It has barely begun.
Blizzard has proven time and again that constant negative feedback is the only thing that DOES help. It took IMBAIMBAIMBA for them to fix Broodlord/Infestor, it took ZParCraft for them to fix Protoss, it took an entire beta's worth of complaints for the Warhound to get the axe, and it took 5 years of bitching and moaning for the Colossus to finally get replaced.
"Change it or we riot" is the only kind of language Blizzard seems to understand when it comes to multiplayer design.
On May 28 2015 09:34 Tresher wrote: This constant negativity in general has to stop. I get that people want to get the best RTS experience since this is pretty much the only RTS at the moment and the last SC 2 game and people want to give Feedback. But constant negative feedback is not going to help.
It has barely begun.
Blizzard has proven time and again that constant negative feedback is the only thing that DOES help. It took IMBAIMBAIMBA for them to fix Broodlord/Infestor, it took ZParCraft for them to fix Protoss, it took an entire beta's worth of complaints for the Warhound to get the axe, and it took 5 years of bitching and moaning for the Colossus to finally get replaced.
"Change it or we riot" is the only kind of language Blizzard seems to understand when it comes to multiplayer design.
On May 28 2015 09:34 Tresher wrote: This constant negativity in general has to stop. I get that people want to get the best RTS experience since this is pretty much the only RTS at the moment and the last SC 2 game and people want to give Feedback. But constant negative feedback is not going to help.
It has barely begun.
Blizzard has proven time and again that constant negative feedback is the only thing that DOES help. It took IMBAIMBAIMBA for them to fix Broodlord/Infestor, it took ZParCraft for them to fix Protoss, it took an entire beta's worth of complaints for the Warhound to get the axe, and it took 5 years of bitching and moaning for the Colossus to finally get replaced.
"Change it or we riot" is the only kind of language Blizzard seems to understand when it comes to multiplayer design.
It took a few days to get rid of the warhound lol
Why does it feel like a lifetime?
Thanks for the fact check. Blizz's track record is bad enough that I really shouldn't need to exaggerate.
On May 28 2015 08:00 FrostedMiniWheats wrote: Even the Liberator's video is lame :/
Yeah all the units were just standing and shooting, it didn't look fun or exciting at all ._.
You guys realise its just a demonstration what to expect from this Unit? If you want to see it in real battles go play the beta (if you have it).
Looks interesting. Patch notes and the video. The only thing I dislike is how there is yet another option for Bio to counter Siege Tanks. As if Medivacs and Marauders aren´t enough (or are Marauders not that strong vs Tanks anymore with the new attack) ? But I guess the situation looks different if there are some Vikings involved. But the battle vs Protss Armies were nice. Looks like you don´t Vikings that much anymore.
I really wanna play the Beta.
From the liberator video, the battle versus the Protoss army only looked nice because the Protoss army walked into a Terran defensive concave while the liberators were given time to siege. Realistically, the liberators would've been torn from the sky the moment the engagement happened. Offensively, the liberators would've died before they would have a chance to siege.
At least, that's what would happen with a colossi-based army. I wonder if it'll be a good viking-ghost intermediary should the Protoss transition from colossi to storm.
The bolded part is exactly why this is nice. I can´t count how many times I have seen, in my games as well as others Protoss steamrolling a Terran Mech Army.
I found that promo to be of no strategic value because the Protoss army waltzed into a concave, since no player of any race would stroll into a sieged-up, fortified position (barring very extraneous circumstances, anyway). It looked all pretty, but it also looked like something an equivalent supplement of siege tanks could've done.
For whatever hopes I personally have for this unit, one of them is certainly not as mech support in TvP, because it seems to simply die hard to blink stalkers that get under them.
This patch sucks. I wasn't winning a whole lot anyway, especially ZvT, and now everything Zerg just got worse than before. I think I'll wait until they make Ravagers not garbage again.
On May 28 2015 09:18 DemigodcelpH wrote: The Liberator is really cool and the ground attack seems well-designed. Kudos to Blizzard to adding more area control and staying true to Terran roots with it.
That said they still need to fix the actual game. Remove terribly designed crap like warpgate/tempests and rework Protoss, rework things so big battles don't end in 4 seconds, and increase the skillcap of the overall game so it's not so easy anymore, and so on.
I'd also like it if they change the scale of the game so the buildings aren't so small compared to units. Looks wacky.
I don't understand why people hate warpgate. As a spectator I think it makes protoss games more interesting to watch. It really makes the way toss reinforces so much more interesting (and also allows for great harassing through the warp prism).
On May 28 2015 09:18 DemigodcelpH wrote: The Liberator is really cool and the ground attack seems well-designed. Kudos to Blizzard to adding more area control and staying true to Terran roots with it.
That said they still need to fix the actual game. Remove terribly designed crap like warpgate/tempests and rework Protoss, rework things so big battles don't end in 4 seconds, and increase the skillcap of the overall game so it's not so easy anymore, and so on.
I'd also like it if they change the scale of the game so the buildings aren't so small compared to units. Looks wacky.
I don't understand why people hate warpgate. As a spectator I think it makes protoss games more interesting to watch. It really makes the way toss reinforces so much more interesting (and also allows for great harassing through the warp prism).
Agree, too much hate for warpgate, I think it's a good mechanic.
On May 28 2015 09:18 DemigodcelpH wrote: The Liberator is really cool and the ground attack seems well-designed. Kudos to Blizzard to adding more area control and staying true to Terran roots with it.
That said they still need to fix the actual game. Remove terribly designed crap like warpgate/tempests and rework Protoss, rework things so big battles don't end in 4 seconds, and increase the skillcap of the overall game so it's not so easy anymore, and so on.
I'd also like it if they change the scale of the game so the buildings aren't so small compared to units. Looks wacky.
I don't understand why people hate warpgate. As a spectator I think it makes protoss games more interesting to watch. It really makes the way toss reinforces so much more interesting (and also allows for great harassing through the warp prism).
Just to clarify, you don't understand what people dislike about warpgate (and the consequences of having it in the game)? Or you understand what people dislike, but think that the good outweighs the bad?
Don't wanna waste my time with explanations if you already get it.
On May 28 2015 09:18 DemigodcelpH wrote: The Liberator is really cool and the ground attack seems well-designed. Kudos to Blizzard to adding more area control and staying true to Terran roots with it.
That said they still need to fix the actual game. Remove terribly designed crap like warpgate/tempests and rework Protoss, rework things so big battles don't end in 4 seconds, and increase the skillcap of the overall game so it's not so easy anymore, and so on.
I'd also like it if they change the scale of the game so the buildings aren't so small compared to units. Looks wacky.
I don't understand why people hate warpgate. As a spectator I think it makes protoss games more interesting to watch. It really makes the way toss reinforces so much more interesting (and also allows for great harassing through the warp prism).
Agree, too much hate for warpgate, I think it's a good mechanic.
people hate because design and counterplay and time contraction and unit interactions
On May 28 2015 09:34 Tresher wrote: This constant negativity in general has to stop. I get that people want to get the best RTS experience since this is pretty much the only RTS at the moment and the last SC 2 game and people want to give Feedback. But constant negative feedback is not going to help.
It has barely begun.
Blizzard has proven time and again that constant negative feedback is the only thing that DOES help. It took IMBAIMBAIMBA for them to fix Broodlord/Infestor, it took ZParCraft for them to fix Protoss, it took an entire beta's worth of complaints for the Warhound to get the axe, and it took 5 years of bitching and moaning for the Colossus to finally get replaced.
"Change it or we riot" is the only kind of language Blizzard seems to understand when it comes to multiplayer design.
LIberators are big, almost like Battlecruisers lol. I like the promise it shows for Sky Terran. Problem for me was I didn't do the research first and just jumped into a game. Didn't know the anti-ground mode needed research, so I got the tech lab, only to find out the research needs the armory. Shit.
On May 28 2015 11:15 NewSunshine wrote: LIberators are big, almost like Battlecruisers lol. I like the promise it shows for Sky Terran. Problem for me was I didn't do the research first and just jumped into a game. Didn't know the anti-ground mode needed research, so I got the tech lab, only to find out the research needs the armory. Shit.
I don't know if it's ironic or fitting that by not doing your research, you failed to do your research for the ability.
On May 28 2015 08:00 FrostedMiniWheats wrote: Even the Liberator's video is lame :/
Yeah all the units were just standing and shooting, it didn't look fun or exciting at all ._.
You guys realise its just a demonstration what to expect from this Unit? If you want to see it in real battles go play the beta (if you have it).
Looks interesting. Patch notes and the video. The only thing I dislike is how there is yet another option for Bio to counter Siege Tanks. As if Medivacs and Marauders aren´t enough (or are Marauders not that strong vs Tanks anymore with the new attack) ? But I guess the situation looks different if there are some Vikings involved. But the battle vs Protss Armies were nice. Looks like you don´t Vikings that much anymore.
I really wanna play the Beta.
From the liberator video, the battle versus the Protoss army only looked nice because the Protoss army walked into a Terran defensive concave while the liberators were given time to siege. Realistically, the liberators would've been torn from the sky the moment the engagement happened. Offensively, the liberators would've died before they would have a chance to siege.
At least, that's what would happen with a colossi-based army. I wonder if it'll be a good viking-ghost intermediary should the Protoss transition from colossi to storm.
The bolded part is exactly why this is nice. I can´t count how many times I have seen, in my games as well as others Protoss steamrolling a Terran Mech Army.
I found that promo to be of no strategic value because the Protoss army waltzed into a concave, since no player of any race would stroll into a sieged-up, fortified position (barring very extraneous circumstances, anyway). It looked all pretty, but it also looked like something an equivalent supplement of siege tanks could've done.
For whatever hopes I personally have for this unit, one of them is certainly not as mech support in TvP, because it seems to simply die hard to blink stalkers that get under them.
Sorry but that is just a bad thing to say. The way it is worded the way you did, you are lierally saying every player, in every league, from every race they play worldwide, would never do such thing. Guess you already started in higher leagues when you started playing this game. Ok maybe there wasn´t that much of a strategy involved there. But like I said, I have seen countless times players (for every race that is) doing the exact same thing that you described: walking into a fortified siege line, lower league and higher leagues up to GM and most of the time come out ahead. And this should not be the case. It should also not be unbreakable either. It should at least take more strategy to break a position like this. And maybe the Liberator will achieve that by forcing the opponent to think twice if they want to engage a position like this.
On May 28 2015 04:02 Hider wrote: Can't express enough how i despise the turret change
So much this
i just died to an oracle... hahaha forgot about the ebay completly
Blizz seem to forget that to keep players in multiplayer once they've played through the campaign, it needs to be fun. For the pro's it's perhaps less of an issue? But the coin flippy nature of SC - the vast variety of ways it's possible to lose to silly cheese is a barrier to getting people in multiplayer in the first place and keeping them playing thereafter.
If the long term success of a game relies on the numbers who play it.. I think this is a fair statement to make.. Then removing aspects of the game which make it easier for scrubs (yet doesn't effect the pro level in any significant way) Is just stupid, in this scrubs most humble opinion.
On May 28 2015 08:00 FrostedMiniWheats wrote: Even the Liberator's video is lame :/
Yeah all the units were just standing and shooting, it didn't look fun or exciting at all ._.
You guys realise its just a demonstration what to expect from this Unit? If you want to see it in real battles go play the beta (if you have it).
Looks interesting. Patch notes and the video. The only thing I dislike is how there is yet another option for Bio to counter Siege Tanks. As if Medivacs and Marauders aren´t enough (or are Marauders not that strong vs Tanks anymore with the new attack) ? But I guess the situation looks different if there are some Vikings involved. But the battle vs Protss Armies were nice. Looks like you don´t Vikings that much anymore.
I really wanna play the Beta.
From the liberator video, the battle versus the Protoss army only looked nice because the Protoss army walked into a Terran defensive concave while the liberators were given time to siege. Realistically, the liberators would've been torn from the sky the moment the engagement happened. Offensively, the liberators would've died before they would have a chance to siege.
At least, that's what would happen with a colossi-based army. I wonder if it'll be a good viking-ghost intermediary should the Protoss transition from colossi to storm.
The bolded part is exactly why this is nice. I can´t count how many times I have seen, in my games as well as others Protoss steamrolling a Terran Mech Army.
I found that promo to be of no strategic value because the Protoss army waltzed into a concave, since no player of any race would stroll into a sieged-up, fortified position (barring very extraneous circumstances, anyway). It looked all pretty, but it also looked like something an equivalent supplement of siege tanks could've done.
For whatever hopes I personally have for this unit, one of them is certainly not as mech support in TvP, because it seems to simply die hard to blink stalkers that get under them.
Sorry but that is just a bad thing to say. The way it is worded the way you did, you are lierally saying every player, in every league, from every race they play worldwide, would never do such thing. Guess you already started in higher leagues when you started playing this game. Ok maybe there wasn´t that much of a strategy involved there. But like I said, I have seen countless times players (for every race that is) doing the exact same thing that you described: walking into a fortified siege line, lower league and higher leagues up to GM and most of the time come out ahead. And this should not be the case. It should also not be unbreakable either. It should at least take more strategy to break a position like this. And maybe the Liberator will achieve that by forcing the opponent to think twice if they want to engage a position like this.
You're right. So as a wood league player who's walked into merciless siege fire like a headless chicken more than once, allow me to rectify my statement:
No good player should walk into a concave (ceteris paribus on a lot of factors, like upgrades and such) and survive it.
However, if your concern about mech is about the fact that armies can walk through it even when mech is in an advantageous position, I will reiterate again:
Those liberators didn't appear to do much more than an equal part of siege tanks could have achieved.
Is your position on mech predicated on the HotS races, or LotV races? Because a HotS immortal is drastically different from a LotV immortal.
And again, between an unusual army composition (that only included what, one or two immortals?) and an unusual army engagement (blink stalkers are the tool against mech), there's nothing to glean from the promo.
On May 28 2015 04:02 Hider wrote: Can't express enough how i despise the turret change
So much this
i just died to an oracle... hahaha forgot about the ebay completly
Blizz seem to forget that to keep players in multiplayer once they've played through the campaign, it needs to be fun. For the pro's it's perhaps less of an issue? But the coin flippy nature of SC - the vast variety of ways it's possible to lose to silly cheese is a barrier to getting people in multiplayer in the first place and keeping them playing thereafter.
If the long term success of a game relies on the numbers who play it.. I think this is a fair statement to make.. Then removing aspects of the game which make it easier for scrubs (yet doesn't effect the pro level in any significant way) Is just stupid, in this scrubs most humble opinion.
Good point here, this is definetly a problem they have to solve somehow. I think another problem what holds a lot of people back are smurfs. It might be a way for pro´s to practice anonymusly but for a silver player that faces a smurfing master player(that has only around 100 games on his smurf) its definetly not fun. I made this experience a few days ago (he even told me he was master I didn´t believed it ofc cause everybody can say that but could easily tell he was right when watching the replay and could even see it ingame) and not to mention I lost that game. And with it my motivation to go on and play some more games. I mean, it was promised that you get players of equal skill, maybe some more, some less. But facing a player that is 10 times better than you just takes the wind out of you.
On May 28 2015 08:00 FrostedMiniWheats wrote: Even the Liberator's video is lame :/
Yeah all the units were just standing and shooting, it didn't look fun or exciting at all ._.
You guys realise its just a demonstration what to expect from this Unit? If you want to see it in real battles go play the beta (if you have it).
Looks interesting. Patch notes and the video. The only thing I dislike is how there is yet another option for Bio to counter Siege Tanks. As if Medivacs and Marauders aren´t enough (or are Marauders not that strong vs Tanks anymore with the new attack) ? But I guess the situation looks different if there are some Vikings involved. But the battle vs Protss Armies were nice. Looks like you don´t Vikings that much anymore.
I really wanna play the Beta.
From the liberator video, the battle versus the Protoss army only looked nice because the Protoss army walked into a Terran defensive concave while the liberators were given time to siege. Realistically, the liberators would've been torn from the sky the moment the engagement happened. Offensively, the liberators would've died before they would have a chance to siege.
At least, that's what would happen with a colossi-based army. I wonder if it'll be a good viking-ghost intermediary should the Protoss transition from colossi to storm.
The bolded part is exactly why this is nice. I can´t count how many times I have seen, in my games as well as others Protoss steamrolling a Terran Mech Army.
I found that promo to be of no strategic value because the Protoss army waltzed into a concave, since no player of any race would stroll into a sieged-up, fortified position (barring very extraneous circumstances, anyway). It looked all pretty, but it also looked like something an equivalent supplement of siege tanks could've done.
For whatever hopes I personally have for this unit, one of them is certainly not as mech support in TvP, because it seems to simply die hard to blink stalkers that get under them.
Sorry but that is just a bad thing to say. The way it is worded the way you did, you are lierally saying every player, in every league, from every race they play worldwide, would never do such thing. Guess you already started in higher leagues when you started playing this game. Ok maybe there wasn´t that much of a strategy involved there. But like I said, I have seen countless times players (for every race that is) doing the exact same thing that you described: walking into a fortified siege line, lower league and higher leagues up to GM and most of the time come out ahead. And this should not be the case. It should also not be unbreakable either. It should at least take more strategy to break a position like this. And maybe the Liberator will achieve that by forcing the opponent to think twice if they want to engage a position like this.
No good player should walk into a concave (ceteris paribus on a lot of factors, like upgrades and such) and survive it.
They do, though. I've seen Korean pros take engagements that you'd think a wood leaguer wouldn't.
And I've seen many a mech aficianado ask for nothing more than the ability to repel dumb pushes that shouldn't work but do work because mech falls over if you look at it very menacingly.
Whether the Liberator will actually provide that is another matter altogether, but that thing you think isn't an issue is very much an issue.
On May 28 2015 08:00 FrostedMiniWheats wrote: Even the Liberator's video is lame :/
Yeah all the units were just standing and shooting, it didn't look fun or exciting at all ._.
You guys realise its just a demonstration what to expect from this Unit? If you want to see it in real battles go play the beta (if you have it).
Looks interesting. Patch notes and the video. The only thing I dislike is how there is yet another option for Bio to counter Siege Tanks. As if Medivacs and Marauders aren´t enough (or are Marauders not that strong vs Tanks anymore with the new attack) ? But I guess the situation looks different if there are some Vikings involved. But the battle vs Protss Armies were nice. Looks like you don´t Vikings that much anymore.
I really wanna play the Beta.
From the liberator video, the battle versus the Protoss army only looked nice because the Protoss army walked into a Terran defensive concave while the liberators were given time to siege. Realistically, the liberators would've been torn from the sky the moment the engagement happened. Offensively, the liberators would've died before they would have a chance to siege.
At least, that's what would happen with a colossi-based army. I wonder if it'll be a good viking-ghost intermediary should the Protoss transition from colossi to storm.
The bolded part is exactly why this is nice. I can´t count how many times I have seen, in my games as well as others Protoss steamrolling a Terran Mech Army.
I found that promo to be of no strategic value because the Protoss army waltzed into a concave, since no player of any race would stroll into a sieged-up, fortified position (barring very extraneous circumstances, anyway). It looked all pretty, but it also looked like something an equivalent supplement of siege tanks could've done.
For whatever hopes I personally have for this unit, one of them is certainly not as mech support in TvP, because it seems to simply die hard to blink stalkers that get under them.
Sorry but that is just a bad thing to say. The way it is worded the way you did, you are lierally saying every player, in every league, from every race they play worldwide, would never do such thing. Guess you already started in higher leagues when you started playing this game. Ok maybe there wasn´t that much of a strategy involved there. But like I said, I have seen countless times players (for every race that is) doing the exact same thing that you described: walking into a fortified siege line, lower league and higher leagues up to GM and most of the time come out ahead. And this should not be the case. It should also not be unbreakable either. It should at least take more strategy to break a position like this. And maybe the Liberator will achieve that by forcing the opponent to think twice if they want to engage a position like this.
No good player should walk into a concave (ceteris paribus on a lot of factors, like upgrades and such) and survive it.
They do, though. I've seen Korean pros take engagements that you'd think a wood leaguer wouldn't.
And I've seen many a mech aficianado ask for nothing more than the ability to repel dumb pushes that shouldn't work but do work because mech falls over if you look at it very menacingly.
Whether the Liberator will actually provide that is another matter altogether, but what you say doesn't happen, and there's no need to "fix," absolutely does and there absolutely is.
That's an issue regarding mech itself, which is a wholly different discussion in its own right. I'm arguing that the liberator isn't likely going to add that sort of stonewall capability, a least not any more than a couple of siege tanks would have.
More likely than not, a better Protoss force than depicted, with proper engagement capacity (like blinking forward) would've left that concave just as decimated.
On May 28 2015 08:00 FrostedMiniWheats wrote: Even the Liberator's video is lame :/
Yeah all the units were just standing and shooting, it didn't look fun or exciting at all ._.
You guys realise its just a demonstration what to expect from this Unit? If you want to see it in real battles go play the beta (if you have it).
Looks interesting. Patch notes and the video. The only thing I dislike is how there is yet another option for Bio to counter Siege Tanks. As if Medivacs and Marauders aren´t enough (or are Marauders not that strong vs Tanks anymore with the new attack) ? But I guess the situation looks different if there are some Vikings involved. But the battle vs Protss Armies were nice. Looks like you don´t Vikings that much anymore.
I really wanna play the Beta.
From the liberator video, the battle versus the Protoss army only looked nice because the Protoss army walked into a Terran defensive concave while the liberators were given time to siege. Realistically, the liberators would've been torn from the sky the moment the engagement happened. Offensively, the liberators would've died before they would have a chance to siege.
At least, that's what would happen with a colossi-based army. I wonder if it'll be a good viking-ghost intermediary should the Protoss transition from colossi to storm.
The bolded part is exactly why this is nice. I can´t count how many times I have seen, in my games as well as others Protoss steamrolling a Terran Mech Army.
I found that promo to be of no strategic value because the Protoss army waltzed into a concave, since no player of any race would stroll into a sieged-up, fortified position (barring very extraneous circumstances, anyway). It looked all pretty, but it also looked like something an equivalent supplement of siege tanks could've done.
For whatever hopes I personally have for this unit, one of them is certainly not as mech support in TvP, because it seems to simply die hard to blink stalkers that get under them.
Sorry but that is just a bad thing to say. The way it is worded the way you did, you are lierally saying every player, in every league, from every race they play worldwide, would never do such thing. Guess you already started in higher leagues when you started playing this game. Ok maybe there wasn´t that much of a strategy involved there. But like I said, I have seen countless times players (for every race that is) doing the exact same thing that you described: walking into a fortified siege line, lower league and higher leagues up to GM and most of the time come out ahead. And this should not be the case. It should also not be unbreakable either. It should at least take more strategy to break a position like this. And maybe the Liberator will achieve that by forcing the opponent to think twice if they want to engage a position like this.
You're right. So as a wood league player who's walked into merciless siege fire like a headless chicken more than once, allow me to rectify my statement:
1. No good player should walk into a concave (ceteris paribus on a lot of factors, like upgrades and such) and survive it.
However, if your concern about mech is about the fact that armies can walk through it even when mech is in an advantageous position, I will reiterate again: 2. Those liberators didn't appear to do much more than an equal part of siege tanks could have achieved.
3 .Is your position on mech predicated on the HotS races, or LotV races? Because a HotS immortal is drastically different from a LotV immortal.
And again, between an unusual army composition (that only included what, one or two immortals?) and an unusual army engagement (blink stalkers are the tool against mech), there's nothing to glean from the promo.
1. That sounds a lot better . 2. If Tanks would actually do damage then yes. 3. I was mostly talking about the past. Meaning WoL and HotS. I know the LotV Immortal is different. Sorry I haven´t seen any Mech vs Protoss games in LOtV yet cause of the lack of people streaming it.
On May 28 2015 08:00 FrostedMiniWheats wrote: Even the Liberator's video is lame :/
Yeah all the units were just standing and shooting, it didn't look fun or exciting at all ._.
You guys realise its just a demonstration what to expect from this Unit? If you want to see it in real battles go play the beta (if you have it).
Looks interesting. Patch notes and the video. The only thing I dislike is how there is yet another option for Bio to counter Siege Tanks. As if Medivacs and Marauders aren´t enough (or are Marauders not that strong vs Tanks anymore with the new attack) ? But I guess the situation looks different if there are some Vikings involved. But the battle vs Protss Armies were nice. Looks like you don´t Vikings that much anymore.
I really wanna play the Beta.
From the liberator video, the battle versus the Protoss army only looked nice because the Protoss army walked into a Terran defensive concave while the liberators were given time to siege. Realistically, the liberators would've been torn from the sky the moment the engagement happened. Offensively, the liberators would've died before they would have a chance to siege.
At least, that's what would happen with a colossi-based army. I wonder if it'll be a good viking-ghost intermediary should the Protoss transition from colossi to storm.
The bolded part is exactly why this is nice. I can´t count how many times I have seen, in my games as well as others Protoss steamrolling a Terran Mech Army.
I found that promo to be of no strategic value because the Protoss army waltzed into a concave, since no player of any race would stroll into a sieged-up, fortified position (barring very extraneous circumstances, anyway). It looked all pretty, but it also looked like something an equivalent supplement of siege tanks could've done.
For whatever hopes I personally have for this unit, one of them is certainly not as mech support in TvP, because it seems to simply die hard to blink stalkers that get under them.
Sorry but that is just a bad thing to say. The way it is worded the way you did, you are lierally saying every player, in every league, from every race they play worldwide, would never do such thing. Guess you already started in higher leagues when you started playing this game. Ok maybe there wasn´t that much of a strategy involved there. But like I said, I have seen countless times players (for every race that is) doing the exact same thing that you described: walking into a fortified siege line, lower league and higher leagues up to GM and most of the time come out ahead. And this should not be the case. It should also not be unbreakable either. It should at least take more strategy to break a position like this. And maybe the Liberator will achieve that by forcing the opponent to think twice if they want to engage a position like this.
No good player should walk into a concave (ceteris paribus on a lot of factors, like upgrades and such) and survive it.
They do, though. I've seen Korean pros take engagements that you'd think a wood leaguer wouldn't.
And I've seen many a mech aficianado ask for nothing more than the ability to repel dumb pushes that shouldn't work but do work because mech falls over if you look at it very menacingly.
Whether the Liberator will actually provide that is another matter altogether, but what you say doesn't happen, and there's no need to "fix," absolutely does and there absolutely is.
That's an issue regarding mech itself, which is a wholly different discussion in its own right. I'm arguing that the liberator isn't likely going to add that sort of stonewall capability, a least not any more than a couple of siege tanks would have.
More likely than not, a better Protoss force than depicted, with proper engagement capacity (like blinking forward) would've left that concave just as decimated.
I feel like this is some really deep theorycraft territory. If you interpreted the unit stats correctly, and if the unit compositions of mech vs Protoss stay relatively similar in LOTV to what they would be in a hypothetical HOTS scenario that doesn't really exist, allowing us to judge how many Blink Stalkers the Protoss has access to and what counterplay the Terran will have against them, and if Blizzard doesn't then change those stats to counter your theory if they're concerned that your theory might be true, then, yes, it's possible that the Liberator won't have added anything brand new to a fight between Maru and PartinG.
Maybe.
As backwards as it might seem to us, Blizzard might want the Liberator to be the new Siege Tank. They may be looking to balance it accordingly.
On May 28 2015 08:00 FrostedMiniWheats wrote: Even the Liberator's video is lame :/
Yeah all the units were just standing and shooting, it didn't look fun or exciting at all ._.
You guys realise its just a demonstration what to expect from this Unit? If you want to see it in real battles go play the beta (if you have it).
Looks interesting. Patch notes and the video. The only thing I dislike is how there is yet another option for Bio to counter Siege Tanks. As if Medivacs and Marauders aren´t enough (or are Marauders not that strong vs Tanks anymore with the new attack) ? But I guess the situation looks different if there are some Vikings involved. But the battle vs Protss Armies were nice. Looks like you don´t Vikings that much anymore.
I really wanna play the Beta.
From the liberator video, the battle versus the Protoss army only looked nice because the Protoss army walked into a Terran defensive concave while the liberators were given time to siege. Realistically, the liberators would've been torn from the sky the moment the engagement happened. Offensively, the liberators would've died before they would have a chance to siege.
At least, that's what would happen with a colossi-based army. I wonder if it'll be a good viking-ghost intermediary should the Protoss transition from colossi to storm.
The bolded part is exactly why this is nice. I can´t count how many times I have seen, in my games as well as others Protoss steamrolling a Terran Mech Army.
I found that promo to be of no strategic value because the Protoss army waltzed into a concave, since no player of any race would stroll into a sieged-up, fortified position (barring very extraneous circumstances, anyway). It looked all pretty, but it also looked like something an equivalent supplement of siege tanks could've done.
For whatever hopes I personally have for this unit, one of them is certainly not as mech support in TvP, because it seems to simply die hard to blink stalkers that get under them.
Sorry but that is just a bad thing to say. The way it is worded the way you did, you are lierally saying every player, in every league, from every race they play worldwide, would never do such thing. Guess you already started in higher leagues when you started playing this game. Ok maybe there wasn´t that much of a strategy involved there. But like I said, I have seen countless times players (for every race that is) doing the exact same thing that you described: walking into a fortified siege line, lower league and higher leagues up to GM and most of the time come out ahead. And this should not be the case. It should also not be unbreakable either. It should at least take more strategy to break a position like this. And maybe the Liberator will achieve that by forcing the opponent to think twice if they want to engage a position like this.
No good player should walk into a concave (ceteris paribus on a lot of factors, like upgrades and such) and survive it.
They do, though. I've seen Korean pros take engagements that you'd think a wood leaguer wouldn't.
And I've seen many a mech aficianado ask for nothing more than the ability to repel dumb pushes that shouldn't work but do work because mech falls over if you look at it very menacingly.
Whether the Liberator will actually provide that is another matter altogether, but what you say doesn't happen, and there's no need to "fix," absolutely does and there absolutely is.
That's an issue regarding mech itself, which is a wholly different discussion in its own right. I'm arguing that the liberator isn't likely going to add that sort of stonewall capability, a least not any more than a couple of siege tanks would have.
More likely than not, a better Protoss force than depicted, with proper engagement capacity (like blinking forward) would've left that concave just as decimated.
Well the way I see the Liberator is like this: TvZ: Obviously it will help against Mutas and will swap roles with the Thor. TvT: It will mostly help breaking siege lines and contains. TvP: I think it will somehow replace the Viking like shown in the video. The Viking will then take more the role its intented: Attacking Capital Ships.
Please Note that Iam only talking about Mech here. But like pure wasted said: this is a lot of theorycrafting here. We will see how it turns out.
On May 28 2015 11:15 NewSunshine wrote: LIberators are big, almost like Battlecruisers lol. I like the promise it shows for Sky Terran. Problem for me was I didn't do the research first and just jumped into a game. Didn't know the anti-ground mode needed research, so I got the tech lab, only to find out the research needs the armory. Shit.
I don't know if it's ironic or fitting that by not doing your research, you failed to do your research for the ability.
Boy that's a weird sentence.
The cosmic irony is never lost on me. I dig the unit though, even though it is like, gigantic, really fucking big. How can it possibly be produced 2 at a time?
My theory is that by making it huge, Blizzard wants people to play with it by making it easier to click, then they scale it down after beta.
On May 28 2015 11:47 pure.Wasted wrote: And I've seen many a mech aficianado ask for nothing more than the ability to repel dumb pushes that shouldn't work but do work because mech falls over if you look at it very menacingly.
On May 28 2015 11:55 Tresher wrote: If Tanks would actually do damage [....]
From the recent FlaSh interview here on TL;
Question: If you had the opportunity to switch BW units with SC2 units then which ones would you choose? Flash:BW tanks and SC2 tanks. I think SC2 tanks are so bad.
When reading of pro level Terran players thoughts, this seems to be a real common gripe. Tanks in BW were good, in SC2.. meh.
The Liberator for me seems somewhat silly, it's covering a role that a tank should be able to do own it's own. It seems this is Blizz's solution to 'late game Terran', give another unit to do the same role as another - but go Redbull mode and add wings. Personally I feel a better solution would of been to just make tanks real tanks, bad ass units not to fuck with without thought, I'm clearly not alone in this view. Then we might of been able to get a real unique and different unit, something new to add more diversity. Of course there is more to the Liberator than this with it's dual mode of operation, I'm aware of that.
Time will tell, definitely going to be looking for pro feedback in upcoming weeks, both here and in chat shows, on their thoughts on this unit,. and how well it integrates, and effects late game Terran.
Blizzard's strategy for the chat system is to put a crappy version of what we really want on there, so, with our complaints of how bad the "test" is, they can justify reverting back and not have to do any real work on the UI.
Yeah all the units were just standing and shooting, it didn't look fun or exciting at all ._.
You guys realise its just a demonstration what to expect from this Unit? If you want to see it in real battles go play the beta (if you have it).
Looks interesting. Patch notes and the video. The only thing I dislike is how there is yet another option for Bio to counter Siege Tanks. As if Medivacs and Marauders aren´t enough (or are Marauders not that strong vs Tanks anymore with the new attack) ? But I guess the situation looks different if there are some Vikings involved. But the battle vs Protss Armies were nice. Looks like you don´t Vikings that much anymore.
I really wanna play the Beta.
From the liberator video, the battle versus the Protoss army only looked nice because the Protoss army walked into a Terran defensive concave while the liberators were given time to siege. Realistically, the liberators would've been torn from the sky the moment the engagement happened. Offensively, the liberators would've died before they would have a chance to siege.
At least, that's what would happen with a colossi-based army. I wonder if it'll be a good viking-ghost intermediary should the Protoss transition from colossi to storm.
The bolded part is exactly why this is nice. I can´t count how many times I have seen, in my games as well as others Protoss steamrolling a Terran Mech Army.
I found that promo to be of no strategic value because the Protoss army waltzed into a concave, since no player of any race would stroll into a sieged-up, fortified position (barring very extraneous circumstances, anyway). It looked all pretty, but it also looked like something an equivalent supplement of siege tanks could've done.
For whatever hopes I personally have for this unit, one of them is certainly not as mech support in TvP, because it seems to simply die hard to blink stalkers that get under them.
Sorry but that is just a bad thing to say. The way it is worded the way you did, you are lierally saying every player, in every league, from every race they play worldwide, would never do such thing. Guess you already started in higher leagues when you started playing this game. Ok maybe there wasn´t that much of a strategy involved there. But like I said, I have seen countless times players (for every race that is) doing the exact same thing that you described: walking into a fortified siege line, lower league and higher leagues up to GM and most of the time come out ahead. And this should not be the case. It should also not be unbreakable either. It should at least take more strategy to break a position like this. And maybe the Liberator will achieve that by forcing the opponent to think twice if they want to engage a position like this.
No good player should walk into a concave (ceteris paribus on a lot of factors, like upgrades and such) and survive it.
They do, though. I've seen Korean pros take engagements that you'd think a wood leaguer wouldn't.
And I've seen many a mech aficianado ask for nothing more than the ability to repel dumb pushes that shouldn't work but do work because mech falls over if you look at it very menacingly.
Whether the Liberator will actually provide that is another matter altogether, but what you say doesn't happen, and there's no need to "fix," absolutely does and there absolutely is.
That's an issue regarding mech itself, which is a wholly different discussion in its own right. I'm arguing that the liberator isn't likely going to add that sort of stonewall capability, a least not any more than a couple of siege tanks would have.
More likely than not, a better Protoss force than depicted, with proper engagement capacity (like blinking forward) would've left that concave just as decimated.
Well the way I see the Liberator is like this: TvZ: Obviously it will help against Mutas and will swap roles with the Thor. TvT: It will mostly help breaking siege lines and contains. TvP: I think it will somehow replace the Viking like shown in the video. The Viking will then take more the role its intented: Attacking Capital Ships.
Please Note that Iam only talking about Mech here. But like pure wasted said: this is a lot of theorycrafting here. We will see how it turns out.
Pretty sure that the Liberator is just the Terran version of AOE anti-air. Zerg has Parasitic Bomb, Terran gets the Liberator, Protoss had the old Tempest that originally dealt AOE anti-air damage.
But in HOTS at least Blizzard realized that more burst AOE damage wasn't what the game needed, but in LOTV they forgot they realized that. It was looking promising at first with the Colossus nerf.
On May 28 2015 04:30 purakushi wrote: Blizzard does not seem to understand that design comes before balance.
I could not have said it better. Blizzard is working hard to polish things that may not even end up in the game.
On May 28 2015 11:47 pure.Wasted wrote: And I've seen many a mech aficianado ask for nothing more than the ability to repel dumb pushes that shouldn't work but do work because mech falls over if you look at it very menacingly.
On May 28 2015 11:55 Tresher wrote: If Tanks would actually do damage [....]
From the recent FlaSh interview here on TL;
Question: If you had the opportunity to switch BW units with SC2 units then which ones would you choose? Flash:BW tanks and SC2 tanks. I think SC2 tanks are so bad.
When reading of pro level Terran players thoughts, this seems to be a real common gripe. Tanks in BW were good, in SC2.. meh.
The Liberator for me seems somewhat silly, it's covering a role that a tank should be able to do own it's own. It seems this is Blizz's solution to 'late game Terran', give another unit to do the same role as another - but go Redbull mode and add wings. Personally I feel a better solution would of been to just make tanks real tanks, bad ass units not to fuck with without thought, I'm clearly not alone in this view. Then we might of been able to get a real unique and different unit, something new to add more diversity. Of course there is more to the Liberator than this with it's dual mode of operation, I'm aware of that.
Time will tell, definitely going to be looking for pro feedback in upcoming weeks, both here and in chat shows, on their thoughts on this unit,. and how well it integrates, and effects late game Terran.
I don't even play Terran and I agree with Flash. SC2 tanks are a joke. I'm convinced they were nerfed simply because tanks plus bio was so strong - and everyone attributed that strength to the tanks. Here we are, years later, and the de facto strat for Terran in each match up is bio. Why? Because it's the best thing they've got.
Tanks should have been left as they were and bio should have been nerfed. We'd have more varied gameplay options for Terran, mech would have been more viable ages ago, and every TvX wouldn't be bio spam.
On May 28 2015 11:26 digmouse wrote: The new chat is like the worst thing ever happens to Starcraft.
I think there was a demand for the sc2 experience to be more social but it was never clear what the best way to achieve that is. So now blizzard just forced us into general chat, which is annoying for a lot of players i guess. I hope you can turn it off after the beta.
By the way they didn't mention that they finally fixed the minimap which makes zvz and zvt playable again.
As zerg the LoTV beta looked promising, finally some strong early game tools with fun new good units, should have known they are gonna make zerg more boring every patch again. Really lost all hope now, they are so clueless.
On May 28 2015 15:17 mCon.Hephaistas wrote: As zerg the LoTV beta looked promising, finally some strong early game tools with fun new good units, should have known they are gonna make zerg more boring every patch again. Really lost all hope now, they are so clueless.
I don't understand why they don't try a middle solution for the roach, like just merging the upgrades Glial Reconstitution and Tunneling Claw into one single upgrade.
On May 28 2015 14:59 shin_toss wrote: Nukes barely hit Avenge's arm tho. Jinro vs Choya is a better example
Yeah, I just gave an example... Nukes have the potential to do terrible terrible damage like Widow mines have, but are a tad more strategic in my opinion - I like them a lot but have not seen them in ages
Damn... Liberators are super fun. I really like everything about the unit. Really weak solo because it can only siege a small area and the transition time is 3 seconds (for fucking ever), but damn are they fun when they allow you to control space. Can't wait to see some pro streams using them!
On May 28 2015 15:17 mCon.Hephaistas wrote: As zerg the LoTV beta looked promising, finally some strong early game tools with fun new good units, should have known they are gonna make zerg more boring every patch again. Really lost all hope now, they are so clueless.
I don't understand why they don't try a middle solution for the roach, like just merging the upgrades Glial Reconstitution and Tunneling Claw into one single upgrade.
I don't like upgrade mergers in most cases. Dumbs down the game.
Instead, Tunneling Claws should be 100/100 (down from 150/150) and hatch tech instead of lair.
Really hope they don't leave things as they are with the roach. Burrow movement speed is what transforms them into a more entertaining unit :/
Joining a new chat channel now sucks. I dont know if there's anyone there until someone talks or not. Also, not being able to see someones league at a glance makes isnt helpful.
I want to know, what did they do with the chat system? If they got rid of the sc2 one, maybe they'll just bring back the BW one? You enter b.net and you're placed in BroodWar usa-12 with a bunch of other people and everything will be good again in life.
On May 28 2015 04:20 flipstar wrote: Just in case blizzard sees this: Oh, new patch. No ladder yet? Ok *keeps on ignoring the lotv client*
This is a beta, you are given access to it, for free, in order to help the game that everyone will buy in a few months. If you participate in the beta only to evaluate your epen, I hope blizzard sees this and revokes any chance from you to participate in future beta.
On May 28 2015 15:21 Heyoka wrote: Does anyone have screenshots of the new chat? Trying to download the update but I'm on hotel internet and its slow
they basically transferred the heroes of the storm chat system to sc2, they even forgot to update their welcome post..
edit: its kinda awkward that you cant see whos in a chat channel unless you type /who, why did they remove the usernames from the side? it doesnt really take up that much room
The new messaging chat room looks crazy fun. I can foresee a lot of twitch meme spams. Here is your modern socialise chat room we have all been waiting for
Energy based weapons on the Terran side ? x.x Liberator looks so high tech compared to every other Terran unit. A total mismatch to Terran design, jet it makes sense as it could be a highly funded project in preparation for what is jet to come.
On May 28 2015 11:47 pure.Wasted wrote: And I've seen many a mech aficianado ask for nothing more than the ability to repel dumb pushes that shouldn't work but do work because mech falls over if you look at it very menacingly.
On May 28 2015 11:55 Tresher wrote: If Tanks would actually do damage [....]
From the recent FlaSh interview here on TL;
Question: If you had the opportunity to switch BW units with SC2 units then which ones would you choose? Flash:BW tanks and SC2 tanks. I think SC2 tanks are so bad.
When reading of pro level Terran players thoughts, this seems to be a real common gripe. Tanks in BW were good, in SC2.. meh.
The Liberator for me seems somewhat silly, it's covering a role that a tank should be able to do own it's own. It seems this is Blizz's solution to 'late game Terran', give another unit to do the same role as another - but go Redbull mode and add wings. Personally I feel a better solution would of been to just make tanks real tanks, bad ass units not to fuck with without thought, I'm clearly not alone in this view. Then we might of been able to get a real unique and different unit, something new to add more diversity. Of course there is more to the Liberator than this with it's dual mode of operation, I'm aware of that.
Time will tell, definitely going to be looking for pro feedback in upcoming weeks, both here and in chat shows, on their thoughts on this unit,. and how well it integrates, and effects late game Terran.
I don't even play Terran and I agree with Flash. SC2 tanks are a joke. I'm convinced they were nerfed simply because tanks plus bio was so strong - and everyone attributed that strength to the tanks. Here we are, years later, and the de facto strat for Terran in each match up is bio. Why? Because it's the best thing they've got.
Tanks should have been left as they were and bio should have been nerfed. We'd have more varied gameplay options for Terran, mech would have been more viable ages ago, and every TvX wouldn't be bio spam.
the solution would have always been to soften up bio by nerfing marauders heavily, allowing a tank buff
i still remember seeing one of the first sc2 pre-beta battle reports made by blizzard, seeing marauders for the first time, seeing how they owned stalkers, and hoping for that shit not to make it into the final game
rauders and roaches have always been the cancer that makes special units like the tank so hard to fit in. who needs tanks when you have a high-hp high damage dealing extremely mobile infantry unit?
On May 28 2015 04:20 flipstar wrote: Just in case blizzard sees this: Oh, new patch. No ladder yet? Ok *keeps on ignoring the lotv client*
This is a beta, you are given access to it, for free, in order to help the game that everyone will buy in a few months. If you participate in the beta only to evaluate your epen, I hope blizzard sees this and revokes any chance from you to participate in future beta.
but playing a beta and trying to be competitive in it just doesn't feel right - there is no ladder yet, for example - something that I feel would help motivate me and my competitive spirit. Right now despite the top 20% getting beta invites the player quality on average is very low - and without a ranking system it's hard to feel good or bad about a victory to me, it just feels empty.
I'm not gonna apologize for being competitive and it being a huge reason why I'm playing Starcraft. I had over 1k games in WOL beta, so I'm sure Blizzard will forgive me. I take it you're bottom 80% if you're unable to relate, apply some lube before reading TL and you might stop becoming so butthurt.
This Liberator... I still haven't played BETA since they added it, but I saw it on a stream. I don't like it at all. And because of this unit (at least that is my assumption), upgrades are again separated. Shame...
Plus I still don't get why Blizzard came back to Engineering Bay as an requirement for Turrets.
I honestly don't like the changes to Terran in LotV. Protoss and Zerg are fine. But that is just me
On May 28 2015 17:19 flipstar wrote:
I'm not gonna apologize for being competitive and it being a huge reason why I'm playing Starcraft. I had over 1k games in WOL beta, so I'm sure Blizzard will forgive me. I take it you're bottom 80% if you're unable to relate, apply some lube before reading TL and you might stop becoming so butthurt.
I have the same, I don't play BETA because there is no ladder. It seems pointless to play And this 20% is not very accurate. I stopped playing SC2 in December (super busy at work...) and I got BETA access last week.
On May 28 2015 17:30 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: A flying unit with 85 ground damage...yeah good luck killing that with hydras or queens. Oh it also shreds mutas. Like only corruptors can kill it...
I like how in the video it says 'effective harassement' as it blows up the defensive force of stalkers with impunity.
with the low attack speed on the anti air you can do a 180° surround attack and you will barely lose any Mutas. And with Hydras ... just avoid where the blaster is aiming it or run through and maybe lose 1 hydra per unit. They only do 85 damage in a tiny circle and lose their anti air. This unit basically wants to force air and ground units being used at the same time.
And the harassment just looks like Tempest + Oracle or Broodlord harassment. The stalkers were just to show oh they outrange ground anti air !
I have always been defending Blizzard, but as the beta goes on, my opinion of the company gets worse with every patch. They are going back and forth, but in general, they're going nowhere. The new chat window is terrible. It's too small and lacks comfort functions that have been standard 10 years ago. The liberator is uninspired and dull, I really don't get why they're not trying to make iconic units like the ghost more viable. I also wish they would try making bio play more viable in the late game. Mech / sky armies suck, as they are slow and good at creating stalemates.
The community had so many great ideas, but most of them weren't even discussed by Blizzard.
I'm also a competitive person, and even though I'm not a high level player, I'd really like to see a complete overhaul of the ladder system. The current one is overcomplicated, obfuscated and offensive to anyone who just wants to know where he's ranked globally.
In the last Remax episode, one of the guys put it very well: Playing SC2 is an isolating experience. As long as it stays that way, I don't think there's a bright future for the game.
Sorry for the inconsistent post, I'm a bit angry right now and my thoughts are all over the place.
On May 28 2015 17:30 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: A flying unit with 85 ground damage...yeah good luck killing that with hydras or queens. Oh it also shreds mutas. Like only corruptors can kill it...
I like how in the video it says 'effective harassement' as it blows up the defensive force of stalkers with impunity.
with the low attack speed on the anti air you can do a 180° surround attack and you will barely lose any Mutas. And with Hydras ... just avoid where the blaster is aiming it or run through and maybe lose 1 hydra per unit. They only do 85 damage in a tiny circle and lose their anti air. This unit basically wants to force air and ground units being used at the same time.
And the harassment just looks like Tempest + Oracle or Broodlord harassment. The stalkers were just to show oh they outrange ground anti air !
The stalkers get killed in 2 shots like in the Video....
Problem is that Liberators are at least x3 times stronger than a tempest, but the reality is that they shot twice as fast, so it's x6 times the efficiency of a tempest, for only 150/150 and 2 supply at starport tech, when Tempest requires 300/200 4 and Fleet beacon.
And Liberators can attack into the circle of other liberators in 15 range. So it's like having 6 tempests out per Liberator.
As for now, LotV is of no interest for me. This game is not StarCraft. It's turning into a MOBA (which I have nothing against tbh, but when I play/watch StarCraft I want an RTS, not a MOBA...), with such ridiculous design decision as adding the liberator, which is a mix between the tank and the thor, except it flies. So uh, why not just making the tank a good unit, and making the thor a good unit (esp. a good ground AA unit) like the Goliath was in BW?
Don't misinterpret that as a "it should be BW 2.0" rant, it's mostly the design decisions that I find utterly ridiculous at this point.
Also, Blizzard said they wanted to experiment, yet I see no consideration about the experimentation of the double harvest model. I've just seen an answer that adresses "theoretically" the model and why they'd not want to, which is bullshit. That's one thing to run the numbers, that's another thing to try it out to see if that's actually a good thing. I even suspect they've done neither, seing how the answer had gross inconsistencies that showed either they didn't understand, or they didn't even read/consider it.
I only see random or quite-random experimentations, really timid, for which the feedback is mostly negative each time...
On May 28 2015 19:14 Ragnarork wrote: So uh, why not just making the tank a good unit, and making the thor a good unit (esp. a good ground AA unit) like the Goliath was in BW?
Factory is already very useful and well rounded and it probably makes Sky-terran more viable.
I have no real opinion as of yet as i havent tested it, but those are valid reasons.
On May 28 2015 19:14 Ragnarork wrote: So uh, why not just making the tank a good unit, and making the thor a good unit (esp. a good ground AA unit) like the Goliath was in BW?
Factory is already very useful and well rounded and it probably makes Sky-terran more viable.
I have no real opinion as of yet as i havent tested it, but those are valid reasons.
In my ideal world, the cyclone would not exist.
Also, making sky terran viable, in my opinion, should be done via well rounded units that aren't too specialized (like everything else should be). If that wasn't a game of counters and hard counters, I think that'd be better overall for many strategies/army compositions.
On May 28 2015 19:14 Ragnarork wrote: So uh, why not just making the tank a good unit, and making the thor a good unit (esp. a good ground AA unit) like the Goliath was in BW?
Factory is already very useful and well rounded and it probably makes Sky-terran more viable.
I have no real opinion as of yet as i havent tested it, but those are valid reasons.
In my ideal world, the cyclone would not exist.
Also, making sky terran viable, in my opinion, should be done via well rounded units that aren't too specialized (like everything else should be). If that wasn't a game of counters and hard counters, I think that'd be better overall for many strategies/army compositions.
Uh...isn't the Liberator precisely too well-rounded?
On May 28 2015 19:14 Ragnarork wrote: So uh, why not just making the tank a good unit, and making the thor a good unit (esp. a good ground AA unit) like the Goliath was in BW?
Factory is already very useful and well rounded and it probably makes Sky-terran more viable.
I have no real opinion as of yet as i havent tested it, but those are valid reasons.
In my ideal world, the cyclone would not exist.
Also, making sky terran viable, in my opinion, should be done via well rounded units that aren't too specialized (like everything else should be). If that wasn't a game of counters and hard counters, I think that'd be better overall for many strategies/army compositions.
Uh...isn't the Liberator precisely too well-rounded?
I think it's just too strong, reducing some of the numbers might be what he's going for.
On May 28 2015 19:14 Ragnarork wrote: So uh, why not just making the tank a good unit, and making the thor a good unit (esp. a good ground AA unit) like the Goliath was in BW?
Factory is already very useful and well rounded and it probably makes Sky-terran more viable.
I have no real opinion as of yet as i havent tested it, but those are valid reasons.
In my ideal world, the cyclone would not exist.
Also, making sky terran viable, in my opinion, should be done via well rounded units that aren't too specialized (like everything else should be). If that wasn't a game of counters and hard counters, I think that'd be better overall for many strategies/army compositions.
I agree and disagree. At the moment, it would take -a ton- of work turning it from the hardcounter to softcounter style and it's understandable that they don't do a 180 in terms of design at this point. With the current foundation, I don't think it's a terrible direction.
That being said, Wc3 was alot more enjoyable than SC2 in many ways and one of the reasons I think is that you could make magic happen with less than optimal units and it's extremely rare that you can go from a good position to losing hard from not paying attention for a second. This effect is amplified in Sc2 due to the macro requirements and it kinda sucks unless you inject korean blood and are able to keep on top of things all the time.
edit: Ironically, Zest just lost to Stats because he missed forcefield with 1 gridspot and DTs got in.
Only massing air units is bad for the game, air units are boring since they don't interact with the environment, etc don't care about high ground, chokes. Therefore you should limit the effectiveness of only air units. What I'm saying is, they shouldn't aim to make Sky terran viable, but instead make sure mech terran is viable.
The liberator is awesome guys. No longer can Protoss just A move into your mech army. Works perfectly with siege tanks mines thors and ravns point defens drone. I love it well done Blizzard!!!!!!!!
Now fix the economy and redesign Protoss and we are all good.
The liberator is strong, but very impobile vs ground units it takes 6sec to unsiege? i got killed by marines before i deployed it lol. Liberator + cyclone seems strong lol.
This change will also help in TvT when Terran just sieges his base. Its a nice siege breacher aswell. but how is zerg gonna hold this if u attack his third put down 2 liberators. how is zerg gonna protect this? With queens that get 2 shotted lol?
Zerg must go hydra queen spore or something if they know Terran will open like this.
I'm sure liberator will get changed next patch. I'm finding it hard to predict if T is going for a bio push with medivacs or if they are pushing libs. being able to build libs from the reactor at their current build time is a bit too fast. Just give the ravager it's range back and give it an air attack other than the easily avoidable corrosive bile. With the last few patches they are just not worth it anymore, they cost so much more than roach,100/100 vs 25/75 with less life, and the same range. the issue with the range nerf is that because the ravager model is so large the ai makes it derp around and when it does find a place in a concave it is so large you lose out on army dps vs roaches. corrosive bile is nice in destroying forcefields but that's pretty niche. I've been trying to get some timings down where it's effective but you really open yourself to early adept/zealot pressure if you move out in time to make it a cost effective move.
Woop found out I'm in the beta. Liberator is less strong than I thought, the transformation takes ages +armory and tech lab research before it can attack ground. And because it cant attack buildings too many of them is anti value. It's very good anti air though. Blink stalkers and marines beat it pretty well. Havent met a zerg yet though, I feel they are going to have a very hard time.
On May 28 2015 19:14 Ragnarork wrote: So uh, why not just making the tank a good unit, and making the thor a good unit (esp. a good ground AA unit) like the Goliath was in BW?
Factory is already very useful and well rounded and it probably makes Sky-terran more viable.
I have no real opinion as of yet as i havent tested it, but those are valid reasons.
In my ideal world, the cyclone would not exist.
Also, making sky terran viable, in my opinion, should be done via well rounded units that aren't too specialized (like everything else should be). If that wasn't a game of counters and hard counters, I think that'd be better overall for many strategies/army compositions.
Uh...isn't the Liberator precisely too well-rounded?
The splash damage seems to be really specific (vs. Mutas, mostly), though the stationary mode could be, I admit.
On May 28 2015 21:33 bigbadgreen wrote: I'm sure liberator will get changed next patch. I'm finding it hard to predict if T is going for a bio push with medivacs or if they are pushing libs. being able to build libs from the reactor at their current build time is a bit too fast. Just give the ravager it's range back and give it an air attack other than the easily avoidable corrosive bile. With the last few patches they are just not worth it anymore, they cost so much more than roach,100/100 vs 25/75 with less life, and the same range. the issue with the range nerf is that because the ravager model is so large the ai makes it derp around and when it does find a place in a concave it is so large you lose out on army dps vs roaches. corrosive bile is nice in destroying forcefields but that's pretty niche. I've been trying to get some timings down where it's effective but you really open yourself to early adept/zealot pressure if you move out in time to make it a cost effective move.
I haven't thought about it but is seems like the Ravager should wreck Liberators in ground mode since they are immobile, but how to get in range alive, that's probably the question as you outlined a little bit
What about removing the Battle Cruiser and give Terran another Bio unit. The Liberator is amazing so tactical but you can also go around it. I am so in love with this unit <3 OMG!!!!!
Made a quick picture of the liberators attack range. The left liberator casts the left circle at it's maximum cast range. But it can attack further all the way up to the scvs in the second circle.
On May 28 2015 21:47 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: I like the general chat, game feels more alive already. They just need to add back portraits and multiple windows and stuff.
Liberator feels much like a Tech Lab unit, however I can understand they want it on Reactor, since that leaves 3 Reactor units and 3 Tech Lab units. MB Banshee's could be scaled down to a Reactor unit instead.
On May 29 2015 00:00 ejozl wrote: Liberator feels much like a Tech Lab unit, however I can understand they want it on Reactor, since that leaves 3 Reactor units and 3 Tech Lab units. MB Banshee's could be scaled down to a Reactor unit instead.
On May 28 2015 04:26 Quateras wrote:And now its becoming more and more hots with 1 or 2 new units :S ugh come on blizzard blow me away with massive changes please /o\
There won't be massive changes. At this point, Blizz is in the state of fine tuning the stats of units and that's all there is to come for LotV. A few people just need some more months of beta to realize this.
On May 29 2015 00:16 Foxxan wrote: Their attack range looks buggy. Why would it be possible to shoot further than what the circle shows.
Their ground attack has the range of 15, but they can only place red circle at the range of 7 I think and because of that they are able to shoot at the red circle area of other Liberators.
I thought that it was bugged at first, but if they really are working like this this can be interesting.
IMO with 15 range it gets really hard to balance such a unit, because it gets so much better the more you have.
GL splitting your army decently vs a dozen of red "dots" that instakill any unit that touches one of them. From 15 range. Flying. It probably has smart targeting too, so they don't overkill. The unit isn't that expensive either, and it can be reactored.
Edit: Ok not really from 15 range, at least one of them needs to be at 7 range to cast the furthest away dot.
Ok just saw this at legacy of the ultras, and then tested it myself.
Roaches can actually burrowmove at slow speed after roachspeed is researched. (without tunneling claws!) When you research tunneling claws they get increased burrowmove speed. I guess this is a bug?
GL splitting your army decently vs a dozen of red "dots" that instakill any unit that touches one of them. From 15 range. Flying. It probably has smart targeting too, so they don't overkill. The unit isn't that expensive either, and it can be reactored.
It's a projectile, so it does overkill (I've seen it happen several times on stream). I think it probably should require a reactor though.
Edit: Ok not really from 15 range, at least one of them needs to be at 7 range to cast the furthest away dot.
Every targeting circle has to have a Liberator within 7(?) range. So if you're using a forward Liberator to spot, you can snipe that one and the rest won't be able to fire.
The unit is really interesting IMO. It and the Lurker are the first real zone control units in this game. I don't know why they didn't change the tank to fit that role, but eh, I'll take what we can get. Slow pushes with this thing are really cool to watch.
I was really confused about this unit. At first I thought it would only be able to attack into its own circle. Admittedly that's a bit confusing when you have multiple liberators, so being able to fire into all the circles which are within range makes sense, but it does mean that when you have 3+ liberators it's easy to cut off an entire attack path. I also reckoned it must be a tech lab unit, since having a 150/150 unit which you can make from a reactor seems excessive, but apparently this is possible. Of course any notion of sky terran would be silly with all the useful units hidden behind tech labs, so I can see why Blizzard made this decision, but it does seem extreme in other ways.
GL splitting your army decently vs a dozen of red "dots" that instakill any unit that touches one of them. From 15 range. Flying. It probably has smart targeting too, so they don't overkill. The unit isn't that expensive either, and it can be reactored.
Edit: Ok not really from 15 range, at least one of them needs to be at 7 range to cast the furthest away dot.
Every targeting circle has to have a Liberator within 7(?) range. So if you're using a forward Liberator to spot, you can snipe that one and the rest won't be able to fire.
I think this is also confusing. It's a unit with 15 range and apparently even if you have vision you can't shoot at the max range unless randomly there is a liberator in between? There's not really an intuitive in-game reason for this to happen.
GL splitting your army decently vs a dozen of red "dots" that instakill any unit that touches one of them. From 15 range. Flying. It probably has smart targeting too, so they don't overkill. The unit isn't that expensive either, and it can be reactored.
It's a projectile, so it does overkill (I've seen it happen several times on stream). I think it probably should require a reactor though.
Edit: Ok not really from 15 range, at least one of them needs to be at 7 range to cast the furthest away dot.
Every targeting circle has to have a Liberator within 7(?) range. So if you're using a forward Liberator to spot, you can snipe that one and the rest won't be able to fire.
The unit is really interesting IMO. It and the Lurker are the first real zone control units in this game. I don't know why they didn't change the tank to fit that role, but eh, I'll take what we can get. Slow pushes with this thing are really cool to watch.
I 100% agree it's interesting and I also thought about the tank could have been great at fitting that role heh :D Just wanted to point out it gets hard to balance such a unit. See what happened to the tempest, altho everyone agrees that unit is oh so much more boring.
On May 29 2015 00:41 Grumbels wrote: I was really confused about this unit. At first I thought it would only be able to attack into its own circle. Admittedly that's a bit confusing when you have multiple liberators, so being able to fire into all the circles which are within range makes sense, but it does mean that when you have 3+ liberators it's easy to cut off an entire attack path. I also reckoned it must be a tech lab unit, since having a 150/150 unit which you can make from a reactor seems excessive, but apparently this is possible. Of course any notion of sky terran would be silly with all the useful units hidden behind tech labs, so I can see why Blizzard made this decision, but it does seem extreme in other ways.
If you're spreading out your targeting circles to cover a larger area, that means your Liberators are exposed since each one has to be within range 7 of its own circle. So there's a risk-reward mechanic there.
I dunno, I don't think sky-terran should be a thing (massing air units is terrible since they ignore terrain), so I don't like the lack of a reactor requirement, but as a supplement for ground based tech paths (bio or mech) the Liberator looks super cool.
Maybe they'll start taking Starcraft more seriously after Heroes launches next week. They are working hard, and after that, they'll put all focus on Starcraft, and Legacy will be awesome...
On May 29 2015 00:48 Sakat wrote: Maybe they'll start taking Starcraft more seriously after Heroes launches next week. They are working hard, and after that, they'll put all focus on Starcraft, and Legacy will be awesome...
On May 29 2015 00:48 Sakat wrote: Maybe they'll start taking Starcraft more seriously after Heroes launches next week. They are working hard, and after that, they'll put all focus on Starcraft, and Legacy will be awesome...
On May 28 2015 21:47 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: I like the general chat, game feels more alive already. They just need to add back portraits and multiple windows and stuff.
On May 29 2015 00:48 Sakat wrote: Maybe they'll start taking Starcraft more seriously after Heroes launches next week. They are working hard, and after that, they'll put all focus on Starcraft, and Legacy will be awesome...
On May 28 2015 21:47 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: I like the general chat, game feels more alive already. They just need to add back portraits and multiple windows and stuff.
On May 28 2015 21:47 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: I like the general chat, game feels more alive already. They just need to add back portraits and multiple windows and stuff.
On May 29 2015 00:41 Grumbels wrote: I was really confused about this unit. At first I thought it would only be able to attack into its own circle. Admittedly that's a bit confusing when you have multiple liberators, so being able to fire into all the circles which are within range makes sense, but it does mean that when you have 3+ liberators it's easy to cut off an entire attack path. I also reckoned it must be a tech lab unit, since having a 150/150 unit which you can make from a reactor seems excessive, but apparently this is possible. Of course any notion of sky terran would be silly with all the useful units hidden behind tech labs, so I can see why Blizzard made this decision, but it does seem extreme in other ways.
If you're spreading out your targeting circles to cover a larger area, that means your Liberators are exposed since each one has to be within range 7 of its own circle. So there's a risk-reward mechanic there.
I dunno, I don't think sky-terran should be a thing (massing air units is terrible since they ignore terrain), so I don't like the lack of a reactor requirement, but as a supplement for ground based tech paths (bio or mech) the Liberator looks super cool.
Well, I'll agree with you in not liking the idea of sky terran (not unless there is a serious redesign of air units and mechanics, which will never happen), but I think that if Blizzard does want to promote it that they can't have all air to ground units requiring tech labs because that makes the infrastructure too expensive, so that's why the lack of tech lab requirement for the liberator makes sense.
Actually, now that I think about it trying out something like sky terran seems like the sort of experiment which is doomed to fail but still potentially interesting for a lengthy beta process. I don't think that's really what Blizzard is doing here though.
Goal Blizzard wants Terran to be able mix mech/bio/air.
Solution Split mech upgrades so that Terran need to upgrade from four armouries (100 gas each) in order to upgrade air and ground. Plus 2 engineering bay if they wish to mix in bio as well.
Discussion Are Blizzard trying to troll us? If their goal was to prevent mixing different unit types I could understand this move but since their goal is the opposite, it does not make sense.
On May 29 2015 02:16 MockHamill wrote: Goal Blizzard wants Terran to be able mix mech/bio/air.
Solution Split mech upgrades so that Terran need to upgrade from four armouries (100 gas each) in order to upgrade air and ground. Plus 2 engineering bay if they wish to mix in bio as well.
Discussion Are Blizzard trying to troll us? If their goal was to prevent mixing different unit types I could understand this move but since their goal is the opposite, it does not make sense.
I think only the Mech Weapon upgrades got seperated. So we only need 3 armories . I don´t think this is too bad. I play Terran myself (Mech mostly) and didn´t like it that players in lower leagues who go bio suddenly can have 3-3 on their few Tanks or any supportive Mech Unit just because its easier to access.
On May 29 2015 02:24 Naphal wrote: the aa attack of the new unit looks a bit weird to me, also why liberator in english and Falke (falcon) in german?
Because it sounds alot better and "Terran-ish" than Befreier or Erlöser (Liberator). Altough it somehow fits the Unit to "liberate" us from pesky Mutas.
On May 29 2015 02:16 MockHamill wrote: Goal Blizzard wants Terran to be able mix mech/bio/air.
Solution Split mech upgrades so that Terran need to upgrade from four armouries (100 gas each) in order to upgrade air and ground. Plus 2 engineering bay if they wish to mix in bio as well.
Discussion Are Blizzard trying to troll us? If their goal was to prevent mixing different unit types I could understand this move but since their goal is the opposite, it does not make sense.
I think only the Mech Weapon upgrades got seperated. So we only need 3 armories . I don´t think this is too bad. I play Terran myself (Mech mostly) and didn´t like it that players in lower leagues who go bio suddenly can have 3-3 on their few Tanks or any supportive Mech Unit just because its easier to access.
On May 29 2015 02:24 Naphal wrote: the aa attack of the new unit looks a bit weird to me, also why liberator in english and Falke (falcon) in german?
Because it sounds alot better and "Terran-ish" than Befreier or Erlöser (Liberator). Altough it somehow fits the Unit to "liberate" us from pesky Mutas.
How well does the Falke fit in with the rest of the German-language units?
I think the combined mech upgrades made terran a bit too adaptable. They could combine them again but it should either have a slightly longer build time or cost a bit more. With the split they are going about it in a round about way. You don't need 4 armories going at once, it forces a choice. Zerg has all of their upgrades split. I'm not advocating to combine zerg upgrades here but it would be similar if upgrading ranged attack for ground also upgraded air attack as well. I think it should stay split to force a priority choice by the player based on what he is seeing from his opponent.
On May 29 2015 02:16 MockHamill wrote: Goal Blizzard wants Terran to be able mix mech/bio/air.
Solution Split mech upgrades so that Terran need to upgrade from four armouries (100 gas each) in order to upgrade air and ground. Plus 2 engineering bay if they wish to mix in bio as well.
Discussion Are Blizzard trying to troll us? If their goal was to prevent mixing different unit types I could understand this move but since their goal is the opposite, it does not make sense.
I think only the Mech Weapon upgrades got seperated. So we only need 3 armories . I don´t think this is too bad. I play Terran myself (Mech mostly) and didn´t like it that players in lower leagues who go bio suddenly can have 3-3 on their few Tanks or any supportive Mech Unit just because its easier to access.
On May 29 2015 02:24 Naphal wrote: the aa attack of the new unit looks a bit weird to me, also why liberator in english and Falke (falcon) in german?
Because it sounds alot better and "Terran-ish" than Befreier or Erlöser (Liberator). Altough it somehow fits the Unit to "liberate" us from pesky Mutas.
How well does the Falke fit in with the rest of the German-language units?
Quite well actually. If you click on "Einheiten" (Units) you can see all the german names. http://eu.battle.net/sc2/de/game/ Some names aren´t even translated like Raven -> Rabe. Some Units are not literally translated like Zealot -> Berserker but are ok. But Blizzard is quite good with translating things. Every small decal or other things that contain texts are translated. They always make it so that the translation contains some "uniqeness" of the translated language. Like SCVs have more of a southern state accent and in german they have a heavy Berlin accent. They also took the German Voice Actor from Arnold Schwarzenegger for the Thor which is awesome.
On May 29 2015 02:44 MockHamill wrote: No they have splitted the mech upgrades into 4 mech upgrades, log into the game and see for yourself.
Well I would if I had a damn Beta Key -_- . Also they should really check the wording when writing these patch notes. It clearly says "Weapon Upgrades" and not Armor Upgrades on the Bnet site.
On May 29 2015 03:03 bigbadgreen wrote: I think the combined mech upgrades made terran a bit too adaptable. They could combine them again but it should either have a slightly longer build time or cost a bit more. With the split they are going about it in a round about way. You don't need 4 armories going at once, it forces a choice. Zerg has all of their upgrades split. I'm not advocating to combine zerg upgrades here but it would be similar if upgrading ranged attack for ground also upgraded air attack as well. I think it should stay split to force a priority choice by the player based on what he is seeing from his opponent.
Terran is already the race the have the hardest time tech switching. They cannot suddenly switch between marines, tanks and viking depending on what they scout. Having 6 upgrades instead of 4 will make it even harder.
On May 28 2015 21:47 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: I like the general chat, game feels more alive already. They just need to add back portraits and multiple windows and stuff.
On May 29 2015 03:03 bigbadgreen wrote: I think the combined mech upgrades made terran a bit too adaptable. They could combine them again but it should either have a slightly longer build time or cost a bit more. With the split they are going about it in a round about way. You don't need 4 armories going at once, it forces a choice. Zerg has all of their upgrades split. I'm not advocating to combine zerg upgrades here but it would be similar if upgrading ranged attack for ground also upgraded air attack as well. I think it should stay split to force a priority choice by the player based on what he is seeing from his opponent.
1.- You can't choose based on what you see from an oponent, when you choose one you are forced to stay there. There is no choice, you choose wich ever is the strong in the current balance, period, at best they may be map dependant, but it doesn't really gives you a choice.
2.- Factory units are not really the best units in SC2, much like its predecesor BW mech, it depends on terrain, something that in SC2 means jack shit, theres nothing really to gain from that, in BW you had everything you needed it in 3 units but in SC2 not, thors are not the best AA there is, they are an awful unit; tanks, well, I don't think we have to say how bad tanks, but they can be picked up!... with a starport unit; hellion and hellbats are good at what they do but what they do is very constricted specially since hellbats need medivacs so much; WM, sigh, probably not the best unit to have with mech, good for bio but not useful for mech because even if tanks and thors are good they are better once you have enough, the only good point of WM is the fast burst damage they do, wich again makes them good with bio but not mech; and finally the cyclone, probably blizzard only hope to make Factory an autonomous tech tree, I hope they don't fuck that up.
3.- Gas, mech is already the single most gas heavy composition in the game, add to that the fact that armories cost gas, unlike ebays evos and forges, and getting so many upgrades is imposible, even in HotS most players go sinle armory because of the gas cost of everything.
In the end nor do I think starport will be an autonomous composition, probably hybrid but it will be weird thats for sure, nor do I think mech its in a state to be viable without starport units, unless heavy turtling is involved, so whatever blizzard does I hope they solve all that.
On May 28 2015 09:34 Tresher wrote: This constant negativity in general has to stop. I get that people want to get the best RTS experience since this is pretty much the only RTS at the moment and the last SC 2 game and people want to give Feedback. But constant negative feedback is not going to help.
It has barely begun.
Blizzard has proven time and again that constant negative feedback is the only thing that DOES help. It took IMBAIMBAIMBA for them to fix Broodlord/Infestor, it took ZParCraft for them to fix Protoss, it took an entire beta's worth of complaints for the Warhound to get the axe, and it took 5 years of bitching and moaning for the Colossus to finally get replaced.
"Change it or we riot" is the only kind of language Blizzard seems to understand when it comes to multiplayer design.
The colossus was replaced? Am I dreaming? Because that sounds too good to be true.
On May 28 2015 09:34 Tresher wrote: This constant negativity in general has to stop. I get that people want to get the best RTS experience since this is pretty much the only RTS at the moment and the last SC 2 game and people want to give Feedback. But constant negative feedback is not going to help.
It has barely begun.
Blizzard has proven time and again that constant negative feedback is the only thing that DOES help. It took IMBAIMBAIMBA for them to fix Broodlord/Infestor, it took ZParCraft for them to fix Protoss, it took an entire beta's worth of complaints for the Warhound to get the axe, and it took 5 years of bitching and moaning for the Colossus to finally get replaced.
"Change it or we riot" is the only kind of language Blizzard seems to understand when it comes to multiplayer design.
The colossus was replaced? Am I dreaming? Because that sounds too good to be true.
Still here, just nerfed and everyone uses the Disruptor instead or in conjunction so it's practically gone. Ish maybe.
On May 28 2015 21:47 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: I like the general chat, game feels more alive already. They just need to add back portraits and multiple windows and stuff.
wait they call the liberator Falke in german lol. I know what they want to avoid by this but Falke is such a bad choice ... I mean does this unit behave like a falcon ? >.<
On May 29 2015 07:32 FeyFey wrote: wait they call the liberator Falke in german lol. I know what they want to avoid by this but Falke is such a bad choice ... I mean does this unit behave like a falcon ? >.<
falcon/eagle, the liberator, anti communist unit... MURICA?
On May 29 2015 03:03 bigbadgreen wrote: I think the combined mech upgrades made terran a bit too adaptable. They could combine them again but it should either have a slightly longer build time or cost a bit more. With the split they are going about it in a round about way. You don't need 4 armories going at once, it forces a choice. Zerg has all of their upgrades split. I'm not advocating to combine zerg upgrades here but it would be similar if upgrading ranged attack for ground also upgraded air attack as well. I think it should stay split to force a priority choice by the player based on what he is seeing from his opponent.
Terran is already the race the have the hardest time tech switching. They cannot suddenly switch between marines, tanks and viking depending on what they scout. Having 6 upgrades instead of 4 will make it even harder.
Terran is also a race that needs to tech switch the least out of all three races. There is a reason that they can't do it easily.
Major bug with cyclones.... I am unable to focus fire carriers with cyclones special ability when on manual or autocast it's frustrating... they seemed to have done some major work on the cyclone ai its a lot better at killing interceptors but its frustrating not to be able to shoot the units i want to... the interceptors get prioritized to the point where i can't tell the cyclones to change target
On May 29 2015 03:03 bigbadgreen wrote: I think the combined mech upgrades made terran a bit too adaptable. They could combine them again but it should either have a slightly longer build time or cost a bit more. With the split they are going about it in a round about way. You don't need 4 armories going at once, it forces a choice. Zerg has all of their upgrades split. I'm not advocating to combine zerg upgrades here but it would be similar if upgrading ranged attack for ground also upgraded air attack as well. I think it should stay split to force a priority choice by the player based on what he is seeing from his opponent.
Terran is already the race the have the hardest time tech switching. They cannot suddenly switch between marines, tanks and viking depending on what they scout. Having 6 upgrades instead of 4 will make it even harder.
Terran is also a race that needs to tech switch the least out of all three races. There is a reason that they can't do it easily.
Yeah, and what happens when the community says "we're tired of Terran not needing to tech switch" and Blizzard says "OK, 20 armor Ultralisks"?
Blizzard wants mech to be a playstyle in LOTV, right? But do they intend for Factory mech to be essentially self-sufficient, or do they want a transition from Factory mech to Skyterran? It's an open question at this point, I don't think they themselves know (which isn't wrong for this stage of beta), but it means we have to keep an open mind.
It's impossible for them to be able to control exactly what they want players to do, but the point is that they want Terran to not sit on the same Upgrade path the entire game. If all techs are the same upgrades, then Terran quickly find the most versatile of unit compositions and do that every game with few mixing in of units. With split up upgrades, getting the upgrade because one unit is absolutely essential, suddenly opens up an entire new tech path and we can hope for transitions to be viable in the matchups.
The engi bay->turret is aswell a smaller version of this. It opens builds where going for only 1 engi bay can be surperior to both going double engi bay, or none at all. It's the same way with the Armory because it allows Hellbats/Thors/the new Liberator Upgrade.
how big is the liberator's air attack splash radius exactly? also, how does the ground targeting work, can it target in other liberator's red circles? also why does it have zero base armor when it has an armored tag? That makes no sense.
On May 29 2015 08:54 Loccstana wrote: how big is the liberator's air attack splash radius exactly? also, how does the ground targeting work, can it target in other liberator's red circles? also why does it have zero base armor when it has an armored tag? That makes no sense.
From what I've seen, it has bigger splash radius than a Thor. On that preview video they are even killing some Air units that aren't so clumped up.
It can target in other Liberator's red circles.
Not sure about 0 armor, that is strange indeed. It's like that they were experimenting with them being light and then forgot to add that 1 armor later when they have turned them into armored. Or it is just an experimentation, armored units with 0 armor.
On May 29 2015 08:35 ejozl wrote: It's impossible for them to be able to control exactly what they want players to do, but the point is that they want Terran to not sit on the same Upgrade path the entire game. If all techs are the same upgrades, then Terran quickly find the most versatile of unit compositions and do that every game with few mixing in of units. With split up upgrades, getting the upgrade because one unit is absolutely essential, suddenly opens up an entire new tech path and we can hope for transitions to be viable in the matchups.
Your concern seems misplaced when bio and Factory mech upgrades - the two upgrade paths that represent the two plausible, independent unit compositions - have always remained perfectly independent of each other. The only thing up for debate is the ease of mech transitions into Skyterran. At the same time, we know so little about LOTV that transitioning might be easy already (thanks to new timings, Cyclones, Liberators, whatever).
It's curious that Blizzard felt the need to separate the upgrades, though.
I wish they would let the cyclone defend against air early on.... proxy anything that flies tvp is all but impossible to hold without marines and or vikings.... when did flying units become considered mech? the broodwar players will attest this is not what we grew up loving and obsessing over. maybe the cyclones special ability needs to be replaced with something else...... tvp mech is really frustrating early game right now.....
On May 29 2015 08:54 Loccstana wrote: how big is the liberator's air attack splash radius exactly? also, how does the ground targeting work, can it target in other liberator's red circles? also why does it have zero base armor when it has an armored tag? That makes no sense.
From what I've seen, it has bigger splash radius than a Thor. On that preview video they are even killing some Air units that aren't so clumped up.
It can target in other Liberator's red circles.
Not sure about 0 armor, that is strange indeed. It's like that they were experimenting with them being light and then forgot to add that 1 armor later when they have turned them into armored. Or it is just an experimentation, armored units with 0 armor.
I want to remind you guys that the Liberator is not the only air Unit that has 0 Armor. Vikings and Void Rays have it too. Altough the Viking could need it too to make it closer to the Goliath (bit more expensive but still). Vikings are flying Goliaths anyway. Don´t know about Void Rays tough. Their DPS is insane. I have seen them owning even light Units when they are in low numbers.
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.
On May 29 2015 03:03 bigbadgreen wrote: I think the combined mech upgrades made terran a bit too adaptable. They could combine them again but it should either have a slightly longer build time or cost a bit more. With the split they are going about it in a round about way. You don't need 4 armories going at once, it forces a choice. Zerg has all of their upgrades split. I'm not advocating to combine zerg upgrades here but it would be similar if upgrading ranged attack for ground also upgraded air attack as well. I think it should stay split to force a priority choice by the player based on what he is seeing from his opponent.
Terran is already the race the have the hardest time tech switching. They cannot suddenly switch between marines, tanks and viking depending on what they scout. Having 6 upgrades instead of 4 will make it even harder.
Terran is also a race that needs to tech switch the least out of all three races. There is a reason that they can't do it easily.
Yeah, and what happens when the community says "we're tired of Terran not needing to tech switch" and Blizzard says "OK, 20 armor Ultralisks"?
Blizzard wants mech to be a playstyle in LOTV, right? But do they intend for Factory mech to be essentially self-sufficient, or do they want a transition from Factory mech to Skyterran? It's an open question at this point, I don't think they themselves know (which isn't wrong for this stage of beta), but it means we have to keep an open mind.
They've stated that each form of terran is self sufficient, or at least that that is their goal. And so what if you want to transition from factory to skyterran? Then you do what every protoss does and throw down starports and start upgrading. If protoss aren't impeded by the fact that their ground and air upgrades are separate terran won't either.
EDIT 2: Also I don't have the beta but from the sounds of it its just weapons. Vehicle plating sounds like its shared, this is even less of a big deal than I thought
On May 29 2015 03:03 bigbadgreen wrote: I think the combined mech upgrades made terran a bit too adaptable. They could combine them again but it should either have a slightly longer build time or cost a bit more. With the split they are going about it in a round about way. You don't need 4 armories going at once, it forces a choice. Zerg has all of their upgrades split. I'm not advocating to combine zerg upgrades here but it would be similar if upgrading ranged attack for ground also upgraded air attack as well. I think it should stay split to force a priority choice by the player based on what he is seeing from his opponent.
Terran is already the race the have the hardest time tech switching. They cannot suddenly switch between marines, tanks and viking depending on what they scout. Having 6 upgrades instead of 4 will make it even harder.
Terran is also a race that needs to tech switch the least out of all three races. There is a reason that they can't do it easily.
Yeah, and what happens when the community says "we're tired of Terran not needing to tech switch" and Blizzard says "OK, 20 armor Ultralisks"?
Blizzard wants mech to be a playstyle in LOTV, right? But do they intend for Factory mech to be essentially self-sufficient, or do they want a transition from Factory mech to Skyterran? It's an open question at this point, I don't think they themselves know (which isn't wrong for this stage of beta), but it means we have to keep an open mind.
They've stated that each form of terran is self sufficient, or at least that that is their goal. And so what if you want to transition from factory to skyterran? Then you do what every protoss does and throw down starports and start upgrading. If protoss aren't impeded by the fact that their ground and air upgrades are separate terran won't either.
I've watched a lot of people play with this unit and I can't help but feel it is just a unit that covers area on the ground like tanks should and does good splash like thors should. They should have just not made this unit, and made tanks and thors do what they are designed to do. Tanks should be stronger at locking down areas and thors should be a little smaller and more mobile. Instead of fixing those units that added a new weird one.
I have no idea how to mech now, without heavy turtling you just die to everything, you need banshees, vikings and medivacs to be out on the map, other wise the only thing you can do is sit behind tanks, thors and turrets, the only other option is to get cyclones but getting a fusion core an armory and 2 upgrades takes some time, so more turtling.
I'll keep playing and wait to see what the pros do, but right now meching seems really hard without air units.
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.
On May 29 2015 12:49 _Darwin_ wrote: Are Liberators supposed to be able to shoot in another's circle radius thing?
Because that's the way it works right now.
E.g. Liberator A casts radius. Liberator B casts radius that doesn't overlap. Liberator A can shoot into Liberator B's radius, and vice versa.
edit: confirmed bug:
Kelphe Quality Assurance Posts: 3,379 Hi everyone,
This is indeed a bug and not intentional. We're looking to resolve this in a future update. Thanks for your reports!
-Kelphe
OOooohhhh, now it makes sense. So all this 15 range is just a placeholder to say "anywhere in the spotted circle", while in practice even the farthest part of the spotted area is not close to 15 units away. The range could just as well be 100, and it'd be the same, as they can only shoot inside the circle anyway.
That also means that they don't scale non-linearly as the bugged version does, where you can build 20 (only 40 supply, lulz) and essentially allow all liberators to shoot everywhere.
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.
On May 29 2015 13:58 Lexender wrote: I have no idea how to mech now, without heavy turtling you just die to everything, you need banshees, vikings and medivacs to be out on the map, other wise the only thing you can do is sit behind tanks, thors and turrets, the only other option is to get cyclones but getting a fusion core an armory and 2 upgrades takes some time, so more turtling.
I'll keep playing and wait to see what the pros do, but right now meching seems really hard without air units.
I don't have beta, I am no good at this game, and I don't even play terran. Nonetheless: I thought people used hellions to stay active with mech?
Btw guys, in French the liberator is called the "Croiseur", which is French for "cruiser". It suggests that the ship is indeed a big one, hence matching the model :D.
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 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 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 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.
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.
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.
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 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?
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.
On May 29 2015 13:58 Lexender wrote: I have no idea how to mech now, without heavy turtling you just die to everything, you need banshees, vikings and medivacs to be out on the map, other wise the only thing you can do is sit behind tanks, thors and turrets, the only other option is to get cyclones but getting a fusion core an armory and 2 upgrades takes some time, so more turtling.
I'll keep playing and wait to see what the pros do, but right now meching seems really hard without air units.
beside that im having trouble with the upgrades, i feel right now you need to decide go full attack or full armor (mostly attack) ... although i just played few games
seens like the fact that liberators can shoot in the area set up by other liberators within their range is not intended; and that's about the only good thing about liberators.
At my level though i think liberator is amazing against mass muta in TvZ. thors are slow and mutas can still deal huge amount of damage before they can defend and it's hard to expand further than the 3rd because of the mobility of mutas. But liberator are actually very mobile even if slower than mutas, it's possible to quickly go defend an expo from mass mutas. Andi t allows to keep massing more tanks/hellions on the ground without the fear of air switches wrecking everything.
For the ground upgrade I think it's just a bonus, it's nice at supporting tanks and controlling choke points, i prefer banshees for harass. I don't think the mass liberator supernova displayed yesterday would work against similar skilled players (I even got matched against him even though i am silver/gold league usually). But he showed that if you go above a base with 4-5 libe and set up the target areas all over it, there is little anyone can do to reclaim the base, although simple static defenses are great against them.
Also i don't like the upgrade split. Mech only really shines with air support be it viking / liberators / ravens. Now to do tank-viking you need like 1000+ more gas worth of upgrades, and even more if you consider building 4 armories. This encourages to turtle even longer than before while waiting to have both air and mech upgrades.
Air alone is not viable. mech alone could be viable if the cyclone could shoot up earlier. Meanwhile protoss share the same upgrade for zealots/stalker/immo/colo (like merged bio/mech upgrades), this makes no sense.
On May 29 2015 23:54 The_Masked_Shrimp wrote: At my level though i think liberator is amazing against mass muta in TvZ. thors are slow and mutas can still deal huge amount of damage before they can defend and it's hard to expand further than the 3rd because of the mobility of mutas. But liberator are actually very mobile even if slower than mutas, it's possible to quickly go defend an expo from mass mutas. Andi t allows to keep massing more tanks/hellions on the ground without the fear of air switches wrecking everything.
Thors do more damage at double the range and can effectively soak banelings even at the pro level and 1 Thor is cheaper than 2 liberators. Thors still win I think.
I'm trying to imagine an anti-lurker use case, but realistically you need Thor support for that to work. And if you added a tl factory for Thors you wouldn't be adding a TL port for valks.
(All dps numbers in old Blizzard time, not real time). To put it in perspective, Storm has radius 1.5, so the Liberator's splash is quite significant.
In your example, the Thor costs 100 less gas, has 40 more HP and 1 more native armor, and naturally won't get his DPS halved when he loses 180 HP. The Thor can also be useful in other capacities en route to the air threat or once the air threat has been neutralized, without needing a 200/200 upgrade.
I'm extremely curious to see if the Liberator will find a home, and whether it can do so with the current numbers.
Also i don't like the upgrade split. Mech only really shines with air support be it viking / liberators / ravens. Now to do tank-viking you need like 1000+ more gas worth of upgrades, and even more if you consider building 4 armories. This encourages to turtle even longer than before while waiting to have both air and mech upgrades.
Your making too much sense here. On the other hand, if you follow David Kim's logic, diversity will be increased when diversity is nerfed! Check out what he writes below:
It will be difficult to upgrade all three of the Barracks, Factory, and Starport tech routes, so we’re hoping to see a good variety of mixed tech units"
Seriosuly, it's like every other time he writes or says something its nonsense (remember the Double Harvest comment or his response to Lalush on micro?)
Maybe Lib's AA should double the damage, twice the attacking speed to make it the same DPS. Right now it takes 8 Libs to one shot Mutas. That a freaking alot of investment just to get harrassment out your base.
(All dps numbers in old Blizzard time, not real time). To put it in perspective, Storm has radius 1.5, so the Liberator's splash is quite significant.
In your example, the Thor costs 100 less gas, has 40 more HP and 1 more native armor, and naturally won't get his DPS halved when he loses 180 HP. The Thor can also be useful in other capacities en route to the air threat or once the air threat has been neutralized, without needing a 200/200 upgrade.
I'm extremely curious to see if the Liberator will find a home, and whether it can do so with the current numbers.
Dont forget thors also have double the range of liberators which is huge.
In your example, the Thor costs 100 less gas, has 40 more HP and 1 more native armor, and naturally won't get his DPS halved when he loses 180 HP. The Thor can also be useful in other capacities en route to the air threat or once the air threat has been neutralized, without needing a 200/200 upgrade.
On the other hand, Liberators are much faster (as fast as stim bio), fly, and can kite back to your marines/turrets/mines quite effectively.
I'm extremely curious to see if the Liberator will find a home, and whether it can do so with the current numbers.
I think the raw combat stats will stay the same. They might tweak the siege/unsiege time after the shared targeting bug goes away, and they'll probably make the upgrade cheaper as well.
I saw a couple of TheSTC games where he used them effectively with bio vs both Protoss and Zerg, so there is promise there.
I like the liberator for its flexibility, from the few games I've played against T, it seems like it's never a bad idea to make 3 liberators, you get excellent defense vs muta opening, and if there are no mutas then they can control space really well and helps with ground attacks too. I guess I'm comparing it to the viking where if there are no more enemy air units they become rather useless, where the liberator is always useful even when enemy air units are gone.
On May 29 2015 23:54 The_Masked_Shrimp wrote: At my level though i think liberator is amazing against mass muta in TvZ. thors are slow and mutas can still deal huge amount of damage before they can defend and it's hard to expand further than the 3rd because of the mobility of mutas. But liberator are actually very mobile even if slower than mutas, it's possible to quickly go defend an expo from mass mutas. Andi t allows to keep massing more tanks/hellions on the ground without the fear of air switches wrecking everything.
Thors do more damage at double the range and can effectively soak banelings even at the pro level and 1 Thor is cheaper than 2 liberators. Thors still win I think.
I'm trying to imagine an anti-lurker use case, but realistically you need Thor support for that to work. And if you added a tl factory for Thors you wouldn't be adding a TL port for valks.
Yes but I was saying for my silver/gold league level. It already take me some time to react so then even if the thor is not so far, after a mass muta attack a base the time for me to send it there all the base will be done for already. It's much morep ractical with liberators and the magic box don't work so well on them due to their higher splash. Also it's not as easy to be caught off position like with thors and you can actually retreat.
It will be difficult to upgrade all three of the Barracks, Factory, and Starport tech routes, so we’re hoping to see a good variety of mixed tech units"
Seriosuly, it's like every other time he writes or says something its nonsense (remember the Double Harvest comment or his response to Lalush on micro?)
Variety as in, different unit composition from game to game. Not variety as in, a composition of a few Barracks units, a few Factory units and a few Starport units. 1,1,1 every single game is not game variety.
It will be difficult to upgrade all three of the Barracks, Factory, and Starport tech routes, so we’re hoping to see a good variety of mixed tech units"
Seriosuly, it's like every other time he writes or says something its nonsense (remember the Double Harvest comment or his response to Lalush on micro?)
Variety as in, different unit composition from game to game. Not variety as in, a composition of a few Barracks units, a few Factory units and a few Starport units. 1,1,1 every single game is not game variety.
Because every game of HOTS devolved into 1,1,1, right?
It will be difficult to upgrade all three of the Barracks, Factory, and Starport tech routes, so we’re hoping to see a good variety of mixed tech units"
Seriosuly, it's like every other time he writes or says something its nonsense (remember the Double Harvest comment or his response to Lalush on micro?)
Variety as in, different unit composition from game to game. Not variety as in, a composition of a few Barracks units, a few Factory units and a few Starport units. 1,1,1 every single game is not game variety.
Because every game of HOTS devolved into 1,1,1, right?
It will be difficult to upgrade all three of the Barracks, Factory, and Starport tech routes, so we’re hoping to see a good variety of mixed tech units"
Seriosuly, it's like every other time he writes or says something its nonsense (remember the Double Harvest comment or his response to Lalush on micro?)
Variety as in, different unit composition from game to game. Not variety as in, a composition of a few Barracks units, a few Factory units and a few Starport units. 1,1,1 every single game is not game variety.
Because every game of HOTS devolved into 1,1,1, right?
Totally
I'm glad we agree that the power and prevalence of 1,1,1 is so disconcerting in this meta, that mech and air upgrades should be split to prevent it while mech to air transitions are being ostensibly encouraged, on the off chance that it becomes a problem which we could have actually made certain of by waiting a little bit because this is, as it so happens, a beta.
It will be difficult to upgrade all three of the Barracks, Factory, and Starport tech routes, so we’re hoping to see a good variety of mixed tech units"
Seriosuly, it's like every other time he writes or says something its nonsense (remember the Double Harvest comment or his response to Lalush on micro?)
Variety as in, different unit composition from game to game. Not variety as in, a composition of a few Barracks units, a few Factory units and a few Starport units. 1,1,1 every single game is not game variety.
What does that have to do with shared upgrades? Shared upgrades doesn't incentive going pure bio every game and never going pure mech. Shared upgrades only makes the cost of mixing in air with ground mech lower. However, that doesn't imply that ground-based (only) mech shouldn't be viable. That's just a consequence of Blizzard making terran ground AA too weak.
The only argument you can put in favor of diversty is that the removal of shared ups makes it possible to make air stronger, and thus incentive more bio + air. But that argument still seems very weak, and it would be easier for David Kim to just write that instead of arguing that diversity - as a whole - will be increased.
Armory upgrades need to be combined. They need to put it back to normal. It's ludicrous not being able to have upgraded banshees/vikings and having to build 4 armories.
Same for turret b4 ebay change. Needs to go back.
Not too excited for LOTV if this is how the game is going.
Also, i find it really saddening that the liberator appears to be a very useless unit, but that's mostly because every game you're going to have 0/0 liberators vs 3/3 zerg/toss due to the terrible armory change.
Just had to make a seperate post about that because the armory change is ludicrous.
It's ludicrous not being able to have upgraded banshees/vikings and having to build 4 armories.
What's the point of building those units anyway? Assuming the Liberator gets balanced, wouldn't that unit almost always be preferable to the Viking and Banshee? Only exception is vs Broodlords/Carriers, but in that case you probably prefer Cyclones.
Obviously if Liberator stays this bad, it will probably be inferior to Vikings/Banshee's - point is I am having a hard time identifying scenarios where all terran units have unique strenghts.
After many weeks of beta we still have a dull and uninteresting game. In the end the game feels like HotS, but with a worse set of units and abysmal balance -which wouldn't bother me if design was interesting, but it's not. So many things are idiotic and just restrict match-ups (cyclones, adepts, lurkers, ultras) and it doesn't get any better with patches.
My last glimmer of hope is that they'll begin to actually care and do sensible things once Heroes is up and running. But it's a very, very faint hope.
It's ludicrous not being able to have upgraded banshees/vikings and having to build 4 armories.
What's the point of building those units anyway? Assuming the Liberator gets balanced, wouldn't that unit almost always be preferable to the Viking and Banshee? Only exception is vs Broodlords/Carriers, but in that case you probably prefer Cyclones.
Obviously if Liberator stays this bad, it will probably be inferior to Vikings/Banshee's - point is I am having a hard time identifying scenarios where all terran units have unique strenghts.
If the Liberator overlaps with anything vs ground, it's the Siege Tank, not Banshee.
Vikings are still very useful in TvT (air control in tank wars, countering a BC transition), and they kill BLs and Carriers dead in case they ever become things. You probably still want a Viking hunting WPs.
It will be difficult to upgrade all three of the Barracks, Factory, and Starport tech routes, so we’re hoping to see a good variety of mixed tech units"
Seriosuly, it's like every other time he writes or says something its nonsense (remember the Double Harvest comment or his response to Lalush on micro?)
Variety as in, different unit composition from game to game. Not variety as in, a composition of a few Barracks units, a few Factory units and a few Starport units. 1,1,1 every single game is not game variety.
What does that have to do with shared upgrades? Shared upgrades doesn't incentive going pure bio every game and never going pure mech. Shared upgrades only makes the cost of mixing in air with ground mech lower. However, that doesn't imply that ground-based (only) mech shouldn't be viable. That's just a consequence of Blizzard making terran ground AA too weak.
The only argument you can put in favor of diversty is that the removal of shared ups makes it possible to make air stronger, and thus incentive more bio + air. But that argument still seems very weak, and it would be easier for David Kim to just write that instead of arguing that diversity - as a whole - will be increased.
My argument was that hypothetically the more paths you divide upgrades into, the more you have to commit into a singular path. Leading to more choices in playstyle. If everything was on the same upgrade, then we quickly find the most versatile of unit compositions, with only few mix ins of other units. It's paradoxical, but I think I'm not talking absolute bullcrap.
If the Liberator overlaps with anything vs ground, it's the Siege Tank, not Banshee.
But what is it the Banshee can do that the Liberator can't? Harass? Check, both can harass. Movement speed? Liberator roughly as fast as upgraded banshee. Straight up engagement? Liberator better (once it gets balanced at least) or at least Banshee isn't good enough, especially without shared ups to ever consider getting the banshee for its straight-up engagement utilty.
Vikings are still very useful in TvT (air control in tank wars, countering a BC transition),
What is the cost efficiency of Liberators vs Vikings? If you go mass vikings order to beat Liberators, doesn't the latter perform better? Vs BC transition, I imagine Cyclones being a lot better in the late game anyway. Anyway I could see Vikings kiting vs Liberators and outperforming them in that regard. But vs toss/zerg it seems that the Liberator dominates these units.
My argument was that hypothetically the more paths you divide upgrades into, the more you have to commit into a singular path. Leading to more choices in playstyle.
The playstyle is a result of the units you build, not the weapon/armor upgrades you get. You play the exact same way with 2/2 as with 1/1.
If everything was on the same upgrade, then we quickly find the most versatile of unit compositions, with only few mix ins of other units.
What? No, you could still go pure mech or pure bio due to how unit synergizes and how the production works.
On May 30 2015 05:19 [PkF] Wire wrote: I have given up all hope about LotV.
After many weeks of beta we still have a dull and uninteresting game. In the end the game feels like HotS, but with a worse set of units and abysmal balance -which wouldn't bother me if design was interesting, but it's not. So many things are idiotic and just restrict match-ups (cyclones, adepts, lurkers, ultras) and it doesn't get any better with patches.
My last glimmer of hope is that they'll begin to actually care and do sensible things once Heroes is up and running. But it's a very, very faint hope.
The worst thing in lotv is the economy which doesn't solve the 3 base income cap, removes defensive playstyles and blatantly favors zerg. As long as this doesn't get fixed (either by reverting to hots or ideally by introducing some form of double harvest) I have no interest at all in lotv. I played 3 games in beta 1 with each race and I had absolutely no fun. The 12 worker start just feels unnatural, the balance is completely off and the "expand or die" mechanic kills all strategic diversity.
The only thing I like is the disruptor replacing the collossus as main Aoe although the disruptor isn't very good designed either. But everything is better than the collossus.
If blizzard doesn't completely change their plans for lotv i fear the death of sc2.
The anti ground attack of the new unit is meant for one thing and one thing only, anti siege tank positions. Because in Blizzard thinking TvT Tank vs Tank is a problem now as it was in WOL (when they wanted static long range/ warhound with anti mech) solution.
I had super high hopes for LOTV when i heard about nerf to Immortal shields, better eco, longer battles, mech vs Protoss; but it's the same shit. For mech they bring a bio2.0 kiting unit like the Warhound instead of fixing the Tank, the eco they only pretend to fix but instead they only put a timer on strategies instead of creating new ones, and about longer battles...nothing. They might as well bring back Browder because they are just as "creative".
I know i'm negative but i was genuinely happy with the direction they said they were going a few months ago, only to be for the "n" time proven wrong...
marine vs banes is the only thing SC2 did right; one game and 2 expansions later and still everything else is inferior to BW. Great job Sc2 design team, you are great!
On May 30 2015 06:05 Hider wrote: What is the cost efficiency of Liberators vs Vikings? If you go mass vikings order to beat Liberators, doesn't the latter perform better? Vs BC transition, I imagine Cyclones being a lot better in the late game anyway.
Anyway I could see Vikings kiting vs Liberators and outperforming them in that regard. But vs toss/zerg it seems that the Liberator dominates these units.
Yeah, what I meant about air control in TvT hinged on ground mech (or biomech) still being the dominant strats. If they are, and Liberators are only built as anti-Vikings, kiting them down should be no trouble. If Liberators are found to be independently worthwhile in TvT and we're liable to see a ton, then Vikings might only be a counter if Bbyong is controlling them.
Who was playing with Corruptor clouds vs bio not too long ago, swiping all the Medivacs out of the air? I want to say soO, but I'm not sure. Anyway, Vikings might be a better counter to Corruptor swarms if those become a thing.
On May 30 2015 06:05 Hider wrote: What is the cost efficiency of Liberators vs Vikings? If you go mass vikings order to beat Liberators, doesn't the latter perform better? Vs BC transition, I imagine Cyclones being a lot better in the late game anyway.
Anyway I could see Vikings kiting vs Liberators and outperforming them in that regard. But vs toss/zerg it seems that the Liberator dominates these units.
Yeah, what I meant about air control in TvT hinged on ground mech (or biomech) still being the dominant strats. If they are, and Liberators are only built as anti-Vikings, kiting them down should be no trouble. If Liberators are found to be independently worthwhile in TvT and we're liable to see a ton, then Vikings might only be a counter if Bbyong is controlling them.
Who was playing with Corruptor clouds vs bio not too long ago, swiping all the Medivacs out of the air? I want to say soO, but I'm not sure. Anyway, Vikings might be a better counter to Corruptor swarms if those become a thing.
It will be difficult to upgrade all three of the Barracks, Factory, and Starport tech routes, so we’re hoping to see a good variety of mixed tech units"
Seriosuly, it's like every other time he writes or says something its nonsense (remember the Double Harvest comment or his response to Lalush on micro?)
Variety as in, different unit composition from game to game. Not variety as in, a composition of a few Barracks units, a few Factory units and a few Starport units. 1,1,1 every single game is not game variety.
What does that have to do with shared upgrades? Shared upgrades doesn't incentive going pure bio every game and never going pure mech. Shared upgrades only makes the cost of mixing in air with ground mech lower. However, that doesn't imply that ground-based (only) mech shouldn't be viable. That's just a consequence of Blizzard making terran ground AA too weak.
The only argument you can put in favor of diversty is that the removal of shared ups makes it possible to make air stronger, and thus incentive more bio + air. But that argument still seems very weak, and it would be easier for David Kim to just write that instead of arguing that diversity - as a whole - will be increased.
My argument was that hypothetically the more paths you divide upgrades into, the more you have to commit into a singular path. Leading to more choices in playstyle. If everything was on the same upgrade, then we quickly find the most versatile of unit compositions, with only few mix ins of other units. It's paradoxical, but I think I'm not talking absolute bullcrap.
Yes, I agree with this. However, the way they're going about it is getting farther away from that if anything. It's certainly not closer.
On May 30 2015 06:05 Hider wrote: What is the cost efficiency of Liberators vs Vikings? If you go mass vikings order to beat Liberators, doesn't the latter perform better? Vs BC transition, I imagine Cyclones being a lot better in the late game anyway.
Anyway I could see Vikings kiting vs Liberators and outperforming them in that regard. But vs toss/zerg it seems that the Liberator dominates these units.
Yeah, what I meant about air control in TvT hinged on ground mech (or biomech) still being the dominant strats. If they are, and Liberators are only built as anti-Vikings, kiting them down should be no trouble. If Liberators are found to be independently worthwhile in TvT and we're liable to see a ton, then Vikings might only be a counter if Bbyong is controlling them.
Who was playing with Corruptor clouds vs bio not too long ago, swiping all the Medivacs out of the air? I want to say soO, but I'm not sure. Anyway, Vikings might be a better counter to Corruptor swarms if those become a thing.
that was soO's teammate dark
Haha, that makes so much sense. It felt like soO and yet not soO. I should have jumped to Dark as soon as I dismissed Soulkey as a possibility. Thanks
It will be difficult to upgrade all three of the Barracks, Factory, and Starport tech routes, so we’re hoping to see a good variety of mixed tech units"
Seriosuly, it's like every other time he writes or says something its nonsense (remember the Double Harvest comment or his response to Lalush on micro?)
Variety as in, different unit composition from game to game. Not variety as in, a composition of a few Barracks units, a few Factory units and a few Starport units. 1,1,1 every single game is not game variety.
What does that have to do with shared upgrades? Shared upgrades doesn't incentive going pure bio every game and never going pure mech. Shared upgrades only makes the cost of mixing in air with ground mech lower. However, that doesn't imply that ground-based (only) mech shouldn't be viable. That's just a consequence of Blizzard making terran ground AA too weak.
The only argument you can put in favor of diversty is that the removal of shared ups makes it possible to make air stronger, and thus incentive more bio + air. But that argument still seems very weak, and it would be easier for David Kim to just write that instead of arguing that diversity - as a whole - will be increased.
My argument was that hypothetically the more paths you divide upgrades into, the more you have to commit into a singular path. Leading to more choices in playstyle. If everything was on the same upgrade, then we quickly find the most versatile of unit compositions, with only few mix ins of other units. It's paradoxical, but I think I'm not talking absolute bullcrap.
The problem is that spliting the upgrades means nothing if the units aren't good, you say that it creates compositions, but it doesn't, all the opposite, mech units are generally shit, starport units are good but aren't good by themselves, the big problems is that if you split the upgrades you punish players for using different unit compositions, if you can only get a handful of units per composition you will only use the units that are the best by themselves.
That obviously means bio will be played 99.999999%. So I guess thats what the community wanted, to kill mech, since apparently everyone hates it, now you can bio, bio-mech, bio-whatever. Hurray for strategic diversity!!
On May 30 2015 04:44 avilo wrote: Armory upgrades need to be combined. They need to put it back to normal. It's ludicrous not being able to have upgraded banshees/vikings and having to build 4 armories.
Same for turret b4 ebay change. Needs to go back.
Not too excited for LOTV if this is how the game is going.
Exactly how? If you're zerg and want to go muta and anything on the ground you need 2 spires (because in this case you're considering only upgrading them at the same time) and 2 possibly 3 evos. If you're protoss and want to go ground and air you need to build 2 cyber cores and 2 possibly 3 forges.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with needing to upgrade separate upgrades if you're making separate unit compositions. Its literally how the entire game works outside of mech ground/mech air in hots.
On May 30 2015 04:44 avilo wrote: Armory upgrades need to be combined. They need to put it back to normal. It's ludicrous not being able to have upgraded banshees/vikings and having to build 4 armories.
Same for turret b4 ebay change. Needs to go back.
Not too excited for LOTV if this is how the game is going.
Exactly how? If you're zerg and want to go muta and anything on the ground you need 2 spires (because in this case you're considering only upgrading them at the same time) and 2 possibly 3 evos. If you're protoss and want to go ground and air you need to build 2 cyber cores and 2 possibly 3 forges.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with needing to upgrade separate upgrades if you're making separate unit compositions. Its literally how the entire game works outside of mech ground/mech air in hots.
1.- Zergs don't need starports to build mutas, 1 spire and they can make mutas from all their hatch.
On May 30 2015 04:44 avilo wrote: Armory upgrades need to be combined. They need to put it back to normal. It's ludicrous not being able to have upgraded banshees/vikings and having to build 4 armories.
Same for turret b4 ebay change. Needs to go back.
Not too excited for LOTV if this is how the game is going.
Exactly how? If you're zerg and want to go muta and anything on the ground you need 2 spires (because in this case you're considering only upgrading them at the same time) and 2 possibly 3 evos. If you're protoss and want to go ground and air you need to build 2 cyber cores and 2 possibly 3 forges.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with needing to upgrade separate upgrades if you're making separate unit compositions. Its literally how the entire game works outside of mech ground/mech air in hots.
1.- Zergs don't need starports to build mutas, 1 spire and they can make mutas from all their hatch.
2.- Cyber cores, don't cost 100 gas
1) To upgrade the mutas you need spires, just like an armory. And spires cost gas before we go to that point 2) You must be kidding if you're seriously suggesting that upgrades should be combined because of a 400 gas (100 gas 4 times in this hypothetical) investment.
I'm curious
Poll: Should Mech Air/Ground upgrades be split?
Yes, and I'm Terran (6)
14%
Yes, and I'm not Terran (16)
37%
No, and I'm Terran (13)
30%
No, and I'm not Terran (8)
19%
43 total votes
Your vote: Should Mech Air/Ground upgrades be split?
(Vote): Yes, and I'm Terran (Vote): Yes, and I'm not Terran (Vote): No, and I'm Terran (Vote): No, and I'm not Terran
On May 30 2015 04:44 avilo wrote: Armory upgrades need to be combined. They need to put it back to normal. It's ludicrous not being able to have upgraded banshees/vikings and having to build 4 armories.
Same for turret b4 ebay change. Needs to go back.
Not too excited for LOTV if this is how the game is going.
Exactly how? If you're zerg and want to go muta and anything on the ground you need 2 spires (because in this case you're considering only upgrading them at the same time) and 2 possibly 3 evos. If you're protoss and want to go ground and air you need to build 2 cyber cores and 2 possibly 3 forges.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with needing to upgrade separate upgrades if you're making separate unit compositions. Its literally how the entire game works outside of mech ground/mech air in hots.
1.- Zergs don't need starports to build mutas, 1 spire and they can make mutas from all their hatch.
2.- Cyber cores, don't cost 100 gas
1) To upgrade the mutas you need spires, just like an armory. And spires cost gas before we go to that point 2) You must be kidding if you're seriously suggesting that upgrades should be combined because of a 400 gas (100 gas 4 times in this hypothetical) investment.
I'm curious
Poll: Should Mech Air/Ground upgrades be split?
Yes, and I'm Terran (6)
14%
Yes, and I'm not Terran (16)
37%
No, and I'm Terran (13)
30%
No, and I'm not Terran (8)
19%
43 total votes
Your vote: Should Mech Air/Ground upgrades be split?
(Vote): Yes, and I'm Terran (Vote): Yes, and I'm not Terran (Vote): No, and I'm Terran (Vote): No, and I'm not Terran
I'm not saying it is, there are other factors of course, the biggest problem with splitting upgrades isn't the strenght of mech, but its capacity to adapt, zerg have by far the best one, protoss have less but WG and CB helps them a ton, terran have by far the least capacity (as it has been pointed out numerous times in the thread) wich is why it doesn't matter if it makes mech weaker, nobody would played because bio will be 100% more efficient, and with the new economy nobody would even less.
Saddly this isn't BW factory units are awful by themselves, it isn't even a X race have Y so other races must too, theres a reason races don't work the same, but I will assure 100% nobody would mech outside of going mass cyclone because all the other mech facotry units are shit.
Zerg has the easiest time switching techs and Zerg has the shittest units. Coincidence?
Mech is not easy to switch away from in-game but it wipes everything out on the ground as the ball moves. I thought that was the point.
The way I see it mech is viable enough in TvT and TvZ. I do not think it will ever be enough alone against P. Give that up and you will see that mech is not weak or dead.
On May 30 2015 04:44 avilo wrote: Armory upgrades need to be combined. They need to put it back to normal. It's ludicrous not being able to have upgraded banshees/vikings and having to build 4 armories.
Same for turret b4 ebay change. Needs to go back.
Not too excited for LOTV if this is how the game is going.
Exactly how? If you're zerg and want to go muta and anything on the ground you need 2 spires (because in this case you're considering only upgrading them at the same time) and 2 possibly 3 evos. If you're protoss and want to go ground and air you need to build 2 cyber cores and 2 possibly 3 forges.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with needing to upgrade separate upgrades if you're making separate unit compositions. Its literally how the entire game works outside of mech ground/mech air in hots.
1.- Zergs don't need starports to build mutas, 1 spire and they can make mutas from all their hatch.
2.- Cyber cores, don't cost 100 gas
1) To upgrade the mutas you need spires, just like an armory. And spires cost gas before we go to that point 2) You must be kidding if you're seriously suggesting that upgrades should be combined because of a 400 gas (100 gas 4 times in this hypothetical) investment.
I'm curious
Poll: Should Mech Air/Ground upgrades be split?
Yes, and I'm Terran (6)
14%
Yes, and I'm not Terran (16)
37%
No, and I'm Terran (13)
30%
No, and I'm not Terran (8)
19%
43 total votes
Your vote: Should Mech Air/Ground upgrades be split?
(Vote): Yes, and I'm Terran (Vote): Yes, and I'm not Terran (Vote): No, and I'm Terran (Vote): No, and I'm not Terran
I'm not saying it is, there are other factors of course, the biggest problem with splitting upgrades isn't the strenght of mech, but its capacity to adapt, zerg have by far the best one, protoss have less but WG and CB helps them a ton, terran have by far the least capacity (as it has been pointed out numerous times in the thread) wich is why it doesn't matter if it makes mech weaker, nobody would played because bio will be 100% more efficient, and with the new economy nobody would even less.
Saddly this isn't BW factory units are awful by themselves, it isn't even a X race have Y so other races must too, theres a reason races don't work the same, but I will assure 100% nobody would mech outside of going mass cyclone because all the other mech facotry units are shit.
Factory units are probably better than any other units in the game in a "by themselves" standpoint. They have absolutely anything you would need. Barracks units almost completely fall apart without medivacs, starport we have yet to really see it on its own. Skytoss is the only thing I could consider as being a better set of units than factory units. Factory units have space control, AoE, great GtA, great GtG, and tanks in both the literal and the hellbat
On May 30 2015 04:44 avilo wrote: Armory upgrades need to be combined. They need to put it back to normal. It's ludicrous not being able to have upgraded banshees/vikings and having to build 4 armories.
Same for turret b4 ebay change. Needs to go back.
Not too excited for LOTV if this is how the game is going.
Exactly how? If you're zerg and want to go muta and anything on the ground you need 2 spires (because in this case you're considering only upgrading them at the same time) and 2 possibly 3 evos. If you're protoss and want to go ground and air you need to build 2 cyber cores and 2 possibly 3 forges.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with needing to upgrade separate upgrades if you're making separate unit compositions. Its literally how the entire game works outside of mech ground/mech air in hots.
1.- Zergs don't need starports to build mutas, 1 spire and they can make mutas from all their hatch.
2.- Cyber cores, don't cost 100 gas
1) To upgrade the mutas you need spires, just like an armory. And spires cost gas before we go to that point 2) You must be kidding if you're seriously suggesting that upgrades should be combined because of a 400 gas (100 gas 4 times in this hypothetical) investment.
I'm curious
Poll: Should Mech Air/Ground upgrades be split?
Yes, and I'm Terran (6)
14%
Yes, and I'm not Terran (16)
37%
No, and I'm Terran (13)
30%
No, and I'm not Terran (8)
19%
43 total votes
Your vote: Should Mech Air/Ground upgrades be split?
(Vote): Yes, and I'm Terran (Vote): Yes, and I'm not Terran (Vote): No, and I'm Terran (Vote): No, and I'm not Terran
I remember one upgrade was combined earlier? I think it was armor? I think splitting up is a good thing, it makes mech to air transition far less just "build them air units".
On May 30 2015 04:44 avilo wrote: Armory upgrades need to be combined. They need to put it back to normal. It's ludicrous not being able to have upgraded banshees/vikings and having to build 4 armories.
Same for turret b4 ebay change. Needs to go back.
Not too excited for LOTV if this is how the game is going.
Exactly how? If you're zerg and want to go muta and anything on the ground you need 2 spires (because in this case you're considering only upgrading them at the same time) and 2 possibly 3 evos. If you're protoss and want to go ground and air you need to build 2 cyber cores and 2 possibly 3 forges.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with needing to upgrade separate upgrades if you're making separate unit compositions. Its literally how the entire game works outside of mech ground/mech air in hots.
1.- Zergs don't need starports to build mutas, 1 spire and they can make mutas from all their hatch.
2.- Cyber cores, don't cost 100 gas
1) To upgrade the mutas you need spires, just like an armory. And spires cost gas before we go to that point 2) You must be kidding if you're seriously suggesting that upgrades should be combined because of a 400 gas (100 gas 4 times in this hypothetical) investment.
I'm curious
Poll: Should Mech Air/Ground upgrades be split?
Yes, and I'm Terran (6)
14%
Yes, and I'm not Terran (16)
37%
No, and I'm Terran (13)
30%
No, and I'm not Terran (8)
19%
43 total votes
Your vote: Should Mech Air/Ground upgrades be split?
(Vote): Yes, and I'm Terran (Vote): Yes, and I'm not Terran (Vote): No, and I'm Terran (Vote): No, and I'm not Terran
I remember one upgrade was combined earlier? I think it was armor? I think splitting up is a good thing, it makes mech to air transition far less just "build them air units".
I would love just the armor being combined again.
The way the patch notes were worded made it sound like they recombined armor (they didn't its all split). I'd prefer that blizzard tests it out this way and then combines armor again if need be, but I wouldn't be opposed to the idea.
I really don't like the idea of a 'core' starport unit, which the liberator seems to be. Having a full-air composition be viable before the super-late game seems like a bad idea to me.
Honestly at this point there are just a few too many units in the game imo. Blizzard is kind of stuck between a rock and a hard place here, since they have to ship some new units with the expansion for all the 'casuals' who won't want to buy an expansion just for an updated economic system. Prime candidates for removal are Swarmhosts and tempests, with maybe void rays, infestors, collossi and even banshees too.
I guess they could accomplish this in kinda the same way it works in HotS now though, where nobody builds tempests or swarm hosts except in extremely rare cases.
*blah blah blah the liberator is overpowered... blah blah blah *blah blah blah the liberator is underpowered... blah blah blah
Don't you realize it is a beta and its stats will be tweaked? Honestly some of you sound like you are going to quit the game because a beta unit is not quite like you want it at this moment.
I was so excited for LotV but now I understand why nobody plays, the changes they make are so bad. Its just fucking imposible to mech without turtling, thors are the worst AA ever, tanks still suck.
I think I'll just wait to see what blizzard does or if a pro finds a way to play because right now this is bull shit, seems like I'll have to keep playing HotS then.
*blah blah blah the liberator is overpowered... blah blah blah *blah blah blah the liberator is underpowered... blah blah blah
Don't you realize it is a beta and its stats will be tweaked? Honestly some of you sound like you are going to quit the game because a beta unit is not quite like you want it at this moment.
Stop being drama-queens.
People are just frustrated that all Blizzard does is throw some toys at us instead of finally starting public experiments on core game mechanics. Given the dawning realization that Godot will never come and the fact that the new toy is even bugged to the point of working completely different than intended people are upset and need to bash something. So they bash the new toy.
Personally, I am upset because they refuse to make mech viable since WoL. With mech I mean positional play centered around the siege tank, not turtling with tanks until you reach a critical mass of ravens or thor/hellion amove timing pushes. I want to be able to slowly push across the map with carefully set up tanks, taking bases and being able to defend them while fending off harass and harassing myself, constantly trying to trade efficiently with my opponent trying to break the push. Unfortunately, tanks are a joke unit. They can't hold a position for their life in SC2. So what does Blizzard do? They give us a disposable single tank shot best used with bio (the mine). After that, they still don't adjust the tank, they give us a mech KITING unit, i.e. a long range bio unit from the factory. I want an alternative playstyle to bio and they give me a factory unit that is used like a bio unit and cannot hold a position as well. After that, they give the tank a new gimmick (medivac pickup) to turn it into a mobile harassment tool (???) instead of letting it do its job. After that, they give us a sky siege unit, instead of adjusting the tank. So even if they ever make "mech" viable, it won't be the mech I (we?) wanted, but a ball of factory units cruising around the map in a protoss-like fashion like you already see it with cylcone/hellion armies.
*blah blah blah the liberator is overpowered... blah blah blah *blah blah blah the liberator is underpowered... blah blah blah
Don't you realize it is a beta and its stats will be tweaked? Honestly some of you sound like you are going to quit the game because a beta unit is not quite like you want it at this moment.
Stop being drama-queens.
People are just frustrated that all Blizzard does is throw some toys at us instead of finally starting public experiments on core game mechanics. Given the dawning realization that Godot will never come and the fact that the new toy is even bugged to the point of working completely different than intended people are upset and need to bash something. So they bash the new toy.
Personally, I am upset because they refuse to make mech viable since WoL. With mech I mean positional play centered around the siege tank, not turtling with tanks until you reach a critical mass of ravens or thor/hellion amove timing pushes. I want to be able to slowly push across the map with carefully set up tanks, taking bases and being able to defend them while fending off harass and harassing myself, constantly trying to trade efficiently with my opponent trying to break the push. Unfortunately, tanks are a joke unit. They can't hold a position for their life in SC2. So what does Blizzard do? They give us a disposable single tank shot best used with bio (the mine). After that, they still don't adjust the tank, they give us a mech KITING unit, i.e. a long range bio unit from the factory. After that, they give the tank a new gimmick (medivac pickup) to turn it into a mobile harassment tool (???) instead of letting it do its job. After that, they give us a sky siege unit, instead of adjusting the tank.
You are perfectly well aware that if Blizzard messed with the core mechanics, people would also be up in arms. There. Is. No. Pleasing. This. Crowd. That's why Blizzard doesn't listen to us. Because no matter what they do, it's wrong. I really don't see how you guys don't see this.
*blah blah blah the liberator is overpowered... blah blah blah *blah blah blah the liberator is underpowered... blah blah blah
Don't you realize it is a beta and its stats will be tweaked? Honestly some of you sound like you are going to quit the game because a beta unit is not quite like you want it at this moment.
Stop being drama-queens.
People are just frustrated that all Blizzard does is throw some toys at us instead of finally starting public experiments on core game mechanics. Given the dawning realization that Godot will never come and the fact that the new toy is even bugged to the point of working completely different than intended people are upset and need to bash something. So they bash the new toy.
Personally, I am upset because they refuse to make mech viable since WoL. With mech I mean positional play centered around the siege tank, not turtling with tanks until you reach a critical mass of ravens or thor/hellion amove timing pushes. I want to be able to slowly push across the map with carefully set up tanks, taking bases and being able to defend them while fending off harass and harassing myself, constantly trying to trade efficiently with my opponent trying to break the push. Unfortunately, tanks are a joke unit. They can't hold a position for their life in SC2. So what does Blizzard do? They give us a disposable single tank shot best used with bio (the mine). After that, they still don't adjust the tank, they give us a mech KITING unit, i.e. a long range bio unit from the factory. After that, they give the tank a new gimmick (medivac pickup) to turn it into a mobile harassment tool (???) instead of letting it do its job. After that, they give us a sky siege unit, instead of adjusting the tank.
You are perfectly well aware that if Blizzard messed with the core mechanics, people would also be up in arms. There. Is. No. Pleasing. This. Crowd. That's why Blizzard doesn't listen to us. Because no matter what they do, it's wrong. I really don't see how you guys don't see this.
No matter what you do, there will always be some people you can never satisfy which won't stop to bitch and moan. However, I think you are oversimplifying things when you say that this is all which is going on here. At the start of the LotV beta, people were very positive and complimented blizzard for the new direction they seemed to be going in at that time. They even seemed to communicate better with the community and be open to experiments and even the most critical and shortsighted people (avilo, anyone?) cut them some slack.
So no, I don't agree with you that people would be up in arms if blizzard started to do what they promised to do with the LotV beta. There would just be the small minority of people who are never satisfied - but you won't get 50%+ for "I don't like the direction they are going in" in votes.
I also don't believe people would be up in arms if Blizzard said "Hey guys, we have this rework for warpgate on our table. It strengthens the gateway, weakens warpgate-centered all-ins and would allow us to rework some gateway units. We have no idea if this rework could work, how about we test it out for three weeks in the beta?".
But this is not how Blizzard communicates. They communicate like this: "Yeah, we totally tried out your suggestions* internally, but they did not feel right."
*on the economy, 3-base-cap, warpgate, unit clumping, slower battles, positional play, etc.
Are they kidding? Did not feel right? What the hell is this supposed to mean? I want a better justification than that if they want to keep mechanics that have been complained about since the dawn of WoL Alpha. This is why people are up in arms.
I love watching TvP now, way better than hots one. The nerf to marauder, the Adept with disruptor I think have nailed it. All the engagements are intense and very dynamic
I think terran can get a buff somewhere but right now it's awesome to watch.
On May 30 2015 10:57 usethis2 wrote: Zerg has the easiest time switching techs and Zerg has the shittest units. Coincidence?
Mech is not easy to switch away from in-game but it wipes everything out on the ground as the ball moves. I thought that was the point.
The way I see it mech is viable enough in TvT and TvZ. I do not think it will ever be enough alone against P. Give that up and you will see that mech is not weak or dead.
Well at least someone understands this.
On May 30 2015 17:56 ETisME wrote: I love watching TvP now, way better than hots one. The nerf to marauder, the Adept with disruptor I think have nailed it. All the engagements are intense and very dynamic
I think terran can get a buff somewhere but right now it's awesome to watch.
To be honest I enjoy watching every match-up more than HotS. A lot more options, still a lot of unexplored stuff, less cheeses and all-ins but they are still there and some new appeared, they are just not as dominant.
When are they going to revert the stasis ward so you can manually activate it again? what a stupid change...
It isn't stupid change. Just think about it for a little bit and you will realize how abused it can be if you could manually detonate it.
I did, and still don't see it.
Have you played with it or watched games with the stasis before this change? It was not only fine but good to watch and fun to play with, the reason blizzard made this change:
"We’re seeing certain strategies with the Oracle’s Stasis ability where players are stacking the ability several times, and then manually detonating them over time to indefinitely leave units in Stasis. With our focus on constant combat, this is obviously something that we have no desire for and this change should effectively end this behavior."
There is a lot of better ways to resolve this issue without completely removing many interesting mechanics the stasis had.
EDIT: few examples of better solutions: -Make stasis ward detonate other stasis in it's radius when it is activated. -Give units a stasis imunity for some time after being affected by it.
On May 30 2015 15:04 Lexender wrote: I was so excited for LotV but now I understand why nobody plays, the changes they make are so bad. Its just fucking imposible to mech without turtling, thors are the worst AA ever, tanks still suck.
I think I'll just wait to see what blizzard does or if a pro finds a way to play because right now this is bull shit, seems like I'll have to keep playing HotS then.
it was impossible to mech without turtling in broodwar....
I don't like that the Liberator is essentially the same idea as the viking and a genuinely interesting unit like the Raven with HSM that does air splash is being made even more redundant by another transformers Wanna be terran unit.
When are they going to revert the stasis ward so you can manually activate it again? what a stupid change...
It isn't stupid change. Just think about it for a little bit and you will realize how abused it can be if you could manually detonate it.
I did, and still don't see it.
Have you played with it or watched games with the stasis before this change? It was not only fine but good to watch and fun to play with, the reason blizzard made this change:
"We’re seeing certain strategies with the Oracle’s Stasis ability where players are stacking the ability several times, and then manually detonating them over time to indefinitely leave units in Stasis. With our focus on constant combat, this is obviously something that we have no desire for and this change should effectively end this behavior."
There is a lot of better ways to resolve this issue without completely removing many interesting mechanics the stasis had.
EDIT: few examples of better solutions: -Make stasis ward detonate other stasis in it's radius when it is activated. -Give units a stasis imunity for some time after being affected by it.
The Warcraft 3 ability Stasis Trap will destroy other nearby Stasis Traps upon detonation, so there clearly is precedent for your idea. You couldn't activate it manually though, so it's not exactly parallel.
When are they going to revert the stasis ward so you can manually activate it again? what a stupid change...
It isn't stupid change. Just think about it for a little bit and you will realize how abused it can be if you could manually detonate it.
I did, and still don't see it.
Have you played with it or watched games with the stasis before this change? It was not only fine but good to watch and fun to play with, the reason blizzard made this change:
"We’re seeing certain strategies with the Oracle’s Stasis ability where players are stacking the ability several times, and then manually detonating them over time to indefinitely leave units in Stasis. With our focus on constant combat, this is obviously something that we have no desire for and this change should effectively end this behavior."
There is a lot of better ways to resolve this issue without completely removing many interesting mechanics the stasis had.
EDIT: few examples of better solutions: -Make stasis ward detonate other stasis in it's radius when it is activated. -Give units a stasis imunity for some time after being affected by it.
Do you realize how game breaking Stasis is if you rush Oracle and manage to put one into mineral line before enemy has turrets/spores? If Oracle starts killing workers while you don't have turrets/spores, it will kill few workers but Marines/Stalkers/Queens will chase it away while at the same time you are making those turrets/spores. If you drop Widow Mines into enemy mineral line while he doesn't have turrets/spores, he will bait them with other units and then get workers back to mining. Now if you make stasis being able to activate manually, one stasis will prevent whole base from mining. You can't bait it like Widow Mines, nor you can just chase it away while making turrets/spores, you have to wait for turrets/spores to finish and that is huge income loss for that time. Let alone in PvP, where if you didn't go for Stargate yourself it is basically over as there is no way to prevent Stasis from freezing all of your workers, and you certainly won't have Robotics for Obs at the time first Oracle flies into your base.
That's just one example, here is another: You are making a timing push against Zerg, you attack his 3rd/4th/whatever base, and keep using Stasis as Terran use Widow Mines in those Bio pushes. So you are standing over your Stasis traps, enemy can't bait them like Mines nor they can snipe them as they have quite large AoE and they are risking half of their army being trapped into Force Fields, and if they engage at least half of their army will be frozen for 30 seconds by Stasis which is basically auto-loss situation, especially when you consider how cost-effective Protoss units are compared to the Zerg units.
There is a ton of things that you could have done that were almost broken with Stasis that was being able to activate manually, they gave only one example. Now if you still want to have manually-activated Stasis you could do it with nerfing a lot of other aspects of that spell and in the end it probably won't be worth using in that state.
*blah blah blah the liberator is overpowered... blah blah blah *blah blah blah the liberator is underpowered... blah blah blah
Don't you realize it is a beta and its stats will be tweaked? Honestly some of you sound like you are going to quit the game because a beta unit is not quite like you want it at this moment.
Stop being drama-queens.
People are just frustrated that all Blizzard does is throw some toys at us instead of finally starting public experiments on core game mechanics. Given the dawning realization that Godot will never come and the fact that the new toy is even bugged to the point of working completely different than intended people are upset and need to bash something. So they bash the new toy.
Personally, I am upset because they refuse to make mech viable since WoL. With mech I mean positional play centered around the siege tank, not turtling with tanks until you reach a critical mass of ravens or thor/hellion amove timing pushes. I want to be able to slowly push across the map with carefully set up tanks, taking bases and being able to defend them while fending off harass and harassing myself, constantly trying to trade efficiently with my opponent trying to break the push. Unfortunately, tanks are a joke unit. They can't hold a position for their life in SC2. So what does Blizzard do? They give us a disposable single tank shot best used with bio (the mine). After that, they still don't adjust the tank, they give us a mech KITING unit, i.e. a long range bio unit from the factory. After that, they give the tank a new gimmick (medivac pickup) to turn it into a mobile harassment tool (???) instead of letting it do its job. After that, they give us a sky siege unit, instead of adjusting the tank.
You are perfectly well aware that if Blizzard messed with the core mechanics, people would also be up in arms. There. Is. No. Pleasing. This. Crowd. That's why Blizzard doesn't listen to us. Because no matter what they do, it's wrong. I really don't see how you guys don't see this.
What? It's beta
Nobody screamed that they experimented with the econ and worker start. It's beta.
People are pissed when they make stupid changes. The fact of the matter is that Blizzard has proven that they don't know what they're doing with SC2.
It's not like this is WoL. We've been through WoL and HOTS.
HOTS was the worst Blizzard expansion I've ever played in regards to multiplayer. They actually let the Swarm Host make it out of alpha and get released as a unit.
This isn't people being reactionary - this is people reading the writing on the wall with how poorly SC2 has turned out.
12 years ago The Frozen Throne completely overhauled armor/damage types and added new units that all had a role to each race. There were only a handful of fumbles.
When are they going to revert the stasis ward so you can manually activate it again? what a stupid change...
It isn't stupid change. Just think about it for a little bit and you will realize how abused it can be if you could manually detonate it.
I did, and still don't see it.
Have you played with it or watched games with the stasis before this change? It was not only fine but good to watch and fun to play with, the reason blizzard made this change:
"We’re seeing certain strategies with the Oracle’s Stasis ability where players are stacking the ability several times, and then manually detonating them over time to indefinitely leave units in Stasis. With our focus on constant combat, this is obviously something that we have no desire for and this change should effectively end this behavior."
There is a lot of better ways to resolve this issue without completely removing many interesting mechanics the stasis had.
EDIT: few examples of better solutions: -Make stasis ward detonate other stasis in it's radius when it is activated. -Give units a stasis imunity for some time after being affected by it.
Do you realize how game breaking Stasis is if you rush Oracle and manage to put one into mineral line before enemy has turrets/spores? 1-If Oracle starts killing workers while you don't have turrets/spores, it will kill few workers but Marines/Stalkers/Queens will chase it away while at the same time you are making those turrets/spores. If you drop Widow Mines into enemy mineral line while he doesn't have turrets/spores, he will bait them with other units and then get workers back to mining. Now if you make stasis being able to activate manually, one stasis will prevent whole base from mining. You can't bait it like Widow Mines, nor you can just chase it away while making turrets/spores, you have to wait for turrets/spores to finish and that is huge income loss for that time. Let alone in PvP, where if you didn't go for Stargate yourself it is basically over as there is no way to prevent Stasis from freezing all of your workers, and you certainly won't have Robotics for Obs at the time first Oracle flies into your base.
That's just one example, here is another: 2-You are making a timing push against Zerg, you attack his 3rd/4th/whatever base, and keep using Stasis as Terran use Widow Mines in those Bio pushes. So you are standing over your Stasis traps, enemy can't bait them like Mines nor they can snipe them as they have quite large AoE and they are risking half of their army being trapped into Force Fields, and if they engage at least half of their army will be frozen for 30 seconds by Stasis which is basically auto-loss situation, especially when you consider how cost-effective Protoss units are compared to the Zerg units.
There is a ton of things that you could have done that were almost broken with Stasis that was being able to activate manually, they gave only one example. Now if you still want to have manually-activated Stasis you could do it with nerfing a lot of other aspects of that spell and in the end it probably won't be worth using in that state.
1-move workers, scan the ward, kill it with marines. no worker lost. or, cry to blizzard change stasis to have 1 HP so you can kill it with workers before it is made.
2-This doesn't even make sense, Protoss does not work like Terran, oracle cost 6x times the gas of WM and stasis can't be activated more than one time, one kills other freezes, there is no point in comparing these two. in your example you make it look like zerg only has low tech units, while protoss has Oracles, sentries and an army strong enough to contest zerg bases lol, so it looks like he is going all in on 2 bases. Anyway, if you build a single ravager you can kill Wards in one shot with the raveger skill, and you don't even need detection nor tech for that.
For the mech / air upgrades, why doesn't Blizzard copy the zerg upgrade model where carapace is shared, but melee and ranged upgrades are not. If mech and sky plating was shared this might be a good compromise instead of constantly changing back and forth on this issue.
*blah blah blah the liberator is overpowered... blah blah blah *blah blah blah the liberator is underpowered... blah blah blah
Don't you realize it is a beta and its stats will be tweaked? Honestly some of you sound like you are going to quit the game because a beta unit is not quite like you want it at this moment.
Stop being drama-queens.
People are just frustrated that all Blizzard does is throw some toys at us instead of finally starting public experiments on core game mechanics. Given the dawning realization that Godot will never come and the fact that the new toy is even bugged to the point of working completely different than intended people are upset and need to bash something. So they bash the new toy.
Personally, I am upset because they refuse to make mech viable since WoL. With mech I mean positional play centered around the siege tank, not turtling with tanks until you reach a critical mass of ravens or thor/hellion amove timing pushes. I want to be able to slowly push across the map with carefully set up tanks, taking bases and being able to defend them while fending off harass and harassing myself, constantly trying to trade efficiently with my opponent trying to break the push. Unfortunately, tanks are a joke unit. They can't hold a position for their life in SC2. So what does Blizzard do? They give us a disposable single tank shot best used with bio (the mine). After that, they still don't adjust the tank, they give us a mech KITING unit, i.e. a long range bio unit from the factory. After that, they give the tank a new gimmick (medivac pickup) to turn it into a mobile harassment tool (???) instead of letting it do its job. After that, they give us a sky siege unit, instead of adjusting the tank.
You are perfectly well aware that if Blizzard messed with the core mechanics, people would also be up in arms. There. Is. No. Pleasing. This. Crowd. That's why Blizzard doesn't listen to us. Because no matter what they do, it's wrong. I really don't see how you guys don't see this.
What? It's beta
Nobody screamed that they experimented with the econ and worker start. It's beta.
People are pissed when they make stupid changes. The fact of the matter is that Blizzard has proven that they don't know what they're doing with SC2.
It's not like this is WoL. We've been through WoL and HOTS.
HOTS was the worst Blizzard expansion I've ever played in regards to multiplayer. They actually let the Swarm Host make it out of alpha and get released as a unit.
This isn't people being reactionary - this is people reading the writing on the wall with how poorly SC2 has turned out.
12 years ago The Frozen Throne completely overhauled armor/damage types and added new units that all had a role to each race. There were only a handful of fumbles.
Lol. Have you seen the amount of bitching about the economy changes? Even though people know it's a beta, they react all the same.
*blah blah blah the liberator is overpowered... blah blah blah *blah blah blah the liberator is underpowered... blah blah blah
Don't you realize it is a beta and its stats will be tweaked? Honestly some of you sound like you are going to quit the game because a beta unit is not quite like you want it at this moment.
Stop being drama-queens.
People are just frustrated that all Blizzard does is throw some toys at us instead of finally starting public experiments on core game mechanics. Given the dawning realization that Godot will never come and the fact that the new toy is even bugged to the point of working completely different than intended people are upset and need to bash something. So they bash the new toy.
Personally, I am upset because they refuse to make mech viable since WoL. With mech I mean positional play centered around the siege tank, not turtling with tanks until you reach a critical mass of ravens or thor/hellion amove timing pushes. I want to be able to slowly push across the map with carefully set up tanks, taking bases and being able to defend them while fending off harass and harassing myself, constantly trying to trade efficiently with my opponent trying to break the push. Unfortunately, tanks are a joke unit. They can't hold a position for their life in SC2. So what does Blizzard do? They give us a disposable single tank shot best used with bio (the mine). After that, they still don't adjust the tank, they give us a mech KITING unit, i.e. a long range bio unit from the factory. After that, they give the tank a new gimmick (medivac pickup) to turn it into a mobile harassment tool (???) instead of letting it do its job. After that, they give us a sky siege unit, instead of adjusting the tank.
You are perfectly well aware that if Blizzard messed with the core mechanics, people would also be up in arms. There. Is. No. Pleasing. This. Crowd. That's why Blizzard doesn't listen to us. Because no matter what they do, it's wrong. I really don't see how you guys don't see this.
What? It's beta
Nobody screamed that they experimented with the econ and worker start. It's beta.
People are pissed when they make stupid changes. The fact of the matter is that Blizzard has proven that they don't know what they're doing with SC2.
It's not like this is WoL. We've been through WoL and HOTS.
HOTS was the worst Blizzard expansion I've ever played in regards to multiplayer. They actually let the Swarm Host make it out of alpha and get released as a unit.
This isn't people being reactionary - this is people reading the writing on the wall with how poorly SC2 has turned out.
12 years ago The Frozen Throne completely overhauled armor/damage types and added new units that all had a role to each race. There were only a handful of fumbles.
Lol. Have you seen the amount of bitching about the economy changes? Even though people know it's a beta, they react all the same.
When the economy changes were first unveiled, there was basically unanimous celebration about Blizzard's attempts to try something new.
Now, people are bitching because Blizzard has stopped trying new things.
It really is that simple. People just want to have visible, physical proof over a sustained period of Beta that Blizzard gives a shit and is willing to test things and see which things the community prefers.
Trying one thing and then saying "Well I guess it's good enough, we can probably polish the shit out of this," while the community thinks there are better alternatives that are at least worth trying and experimenting with is just the same old shit.
People are complaining about the economy changes because they don't like them and Blizzard isn't experimenting with the economy like they claimed they would. Instead they're making little changes like adjusting the amount of reduced resources by 10%. These are small balance adjustments, not the sort of changes they claimed we would see during a long beta.
Why is david kim still on balance team? with all do respect sc2 has been so boring since first year. Back then at least they tried a lot more than now and it was a lot of fun meta changing.
Corruptor is one of the units that were wrongly designed up from the get-go. Hard to do anything smart with it now. Just watched a short video on the Liberator... daaamn it looks ugly ! and the attack animations are so bad I'm lost for words. I don't even feel like the unit is interesting. Uncool stuff Blizzard. Uncool indeed.
I hate the new Eco!!!! plz Blizzard do something about it, it sucks.
Liberator on the other hand is really cool and I like it a lot. Well done. Mech is finally viable. Now change the upgrades back or at least the amor upgrade sould be shared. 4 Armories is a joke.
When are they going to revert the stasis ward so you can manually activate it again? what a stupid change...
It isn't stupid change. Just think about it for a little bit and you will realize how abused it can be if you could manually detonate it.
I did, and still don't see it.
Have you played with it or watched games with the stasis before this change? It was not only fine but good to watch and fun to play with, the reason blizzard made this change:
"We’re seeing certain strategies with the Oracle’s Stasis ability where players are stacking the ability several times, and then manually detonating them over time to indefinitely leave units in Stasis. With our focus on constant combat, this is obviously something that we have no desire for and this change should effectively end this behavior."
There is a lot of better ways to resolve this issue without completely removing many interesting mechanics the stasis had.
EDIT: few examples of better solutions: -Make stasis ward detonate other stasis in it's radius when it is activated. -Give units a stasis imunity for some time after being affected by it.
Do you realize how game breaking Stasis is if you rush Oracle and manage to put one into mineral line before enemy has turrets/spores? If Oracle starts killing workers while you don't have turrets/spores, it will kill few workers but Marines/Stalkers/Queens will chase it away while at the same time you are making those turrets/spores. If you drop Widow Mines into enemy mineral line while he doesn't have turrets/spores, he will bait them with other units and then get workers back to mining. Now if you make stasis being able to activate manually, one stasis will prevent whole base from mining. You can't bait it like Widow Mines, nor you can just chase it away while making turrets/spores, you have to wait for turrets/spores to finish and that is huge income loss for that time. Let alone in PvP, where if you didn't go for Stargate yourself it is basically over as there is no way to prevent Stasis from freezing all of your workers, and you certainly won't have Robotics for Obs at the time first Oracle flies into your base.
That's just one example, here is another: You are making a timing push against Zerg, you attack his 3rd/4th/whatever base, and keep using Stasis as Terran use Widow Mines in those Bio pushes. So you are standing over your Stasis traps, enemy can't bait them like Mines nor they can snipe them as they have quite large AoE and they are risking half of their army being trapped into Force Fields, and if they engage at least half of their army will be frozen for 30 seconds by Stasis which is basically auto-loss situation, especially when you consider how cost-effective Protoss units are compared to the Zerg units.
There is a ton of things that you could have done that were almost broken with Stasis that was being able to activate manually, they gave only one example. Now if you still want to have manually-activated Stasis you could do it with nerfing a lot of other aspects of that spell and in the end it probably won't be worth using in that state.
The mineral loss of stasis in a min line is actually not worth it. You are better off killing 3 or 4 workers than you are putting a stasis in mineral line.
I remember the math being done way back for when it was the mineral blocking ability on the oracle in HotS beta and people just realised it was actually not very impactful.
the loss of a worker and its mining time and its replacement cost is far higher than it is to keep them from working the mineral line for even 60seconds
On May 30 2015 17:56 ETisME wrote: I love watching TvP now, way better than hots one. The nerf to marauder, the Adept with disruptor I think have nailed it. All the engagements are intense and very dynamic
I think terran can get a buff somewhere but right now it's awesome to watch.
Yeah I think some of the positive stuff Blizzard are doing is not being focused on. What you describe is addressing some long standing problems - Tier 1 unit-interaction. ie. Nerfing maurauder indirectly buffs Protoss gateway units.
On June 01 2015 10:04 abendrot wrote: I hate the new Eco!!!! plz Blizzard do something about it, it sucks.
Liberator on the other hand is really cool and I like it a lot. Well done. Mech is finally viable. Now change the upgrades back or at least the amor upgrade sould be shared. 4 Armories is a joke.
Seems like the reasoning is this: Blizzard separates the upgrades and brings in a strong air unit. Not really to compliment mech but to give a mainly air army (besides mass raven) a chance. Since it's beta I guess they want to see how people optimize various unit comps-- i.e. if mostly mech what and how much anti-air do you use or if going airmech how many hellios are in your army etc.
The complaints seem to be focused around now 'needing' a ton of armories and upgrades whirling away so that air and mech together are viable-- contrary to what blizzard is saying regarding 2 distinct and viable techpaths. Needing to make certain strategic prioritization has been a part of teching for all 3 races the whole time. This is just trying to squeeze out a 3rd option for terran which is what has been asked for.
*blah blah blah the liberator is overpowered... blah blah blah *blah blah blah the liberator is underpowered... blah blah blah
Don't you realize it is a beta and its stats will be tweaked? Honestly some of you sound like you are going to quit the game because a beta unit is not quite like you want it at this moment.
Stop being drama-queens.
People are just frustrated that all Blizzard does is throw some toys at us instead of finally starting public experiments on core game mechanics. Given the dawning realization that Godot will never come and the fact that the new toy is even bugged to the point of working completely different than intended people are upset and need to bash something. So they bash the new toy.
Personally, I am upset because they refuse to make mech viable since WoL. With mech I mean positional play centered around the siege tank, not turtling with tanks until you reach a critical mass of ravens or thor/hellion amove timing pushes. I want to be able to slowly push across the map with carefully set up tanks, taking bases and being able to defend them while fending off harass and harassing myself, constantly trying to trade efficiently with my opponent trying to break the push. Unfortunately, tanks are a joke unit. They can't hold a position for their life in SC2. So what does Blizzard do? They give us a disposable single tank shot best used with bio (the mine). After that, they still don't adjust the tank, they give us a mech KITING unit, i.e. a long range bio unit from the factory. After that, they give the tank a new gimmick (medivac pickup) to turn it into a mobile harassment tool (???) instead of letting it do its job. After that, they give us a sky siege unit, instead of adjusting the tank.
You are perfectly well aware that if Blizzard messed with the core mechanics, people would also be up in arms. There. Is. No. Pleasing. This. Crowd. That's why Blizzard doesn't listen to us. Because no matter what they do, it's wrong. I really don't see how you guys don't see this.
A fact of life is that you can't please everybody and that perfection does not exist.. But that doesn't mean Blizzard should give up on trying to please the majority and make as many happy as possible. That's why voicing your opinion and debating inadequacies is good, if they realise that the majority of the community have an issue with the game, they should start listening and doing. Otherwise the majority will just keep complaining and/or walk away..
*blah blah blah the liberator is overpowered... blah blah blah *blah blah blah the liberator is underpowered... blah blah blah
Don't you realize it is a beta and its stats will be tweaked? Honestly some of you sound like you are going to quit the game because a beta unit is not quite like you want it at this moment.
Stop being drama-queens.
People are just frustrated that all Blizzard does is throw some toys at us instead of finally starting public experiments on core game mechanics. Given the dawning realization that Godot will never come and the fact that the new toy is even bugged to the point of working completely different than intended people are upset and need to bash something. So they bash the new toy.
Personally, I am upset because they refuse to make mech viable since WoL. With mech I mean positional play centered around the siege tank, not turtling with tanks until you reach a critical mass of ravens or thor/hellion amove timing pushes. I want to be able to slowly push across the map with carefully set up tanks, taking bases and being able to defend them while fending off harass and harassing myself, constantly trying to trade efficiently with my opponent trying to break the push. Unfortunately, tanks are a joke unit. They can't hold a position for their life in SC2. So what does Blizzard do? They give us a disposable single tank shot best used with bio (the mine). After that, they still don't adjust the tank, they give us a mech KITING unit, i.e. a long range bio unit from the factory. After that, they give the tank a new gimmick (medivac pickup) to turn it into a mobile harassment tool (???) instead of letting it do its job. After that, they give us a sky siege unit, instead of adjusting the tank.
You are perfectly well aware that if Blizzard messed with the core mechanics, people would also be up in arms. There. Is. No. Pleasing. This. Crowd. That's why Blizzard doesn't listen to us. Because no matter what they do, it's wrong. I really don't see how you guys don't see this.
A fact of life is that you can't please everybody and that perfection does not exist.. But that doesn't mean Blizzard should give up on trying to please the majority and make as many happy as possible. That's why voicing your opinion and debating inadequacies is good, if they realise that the majority of the community have an issue with the game, they should start listening and doing. Otherwise the majority will just keep complaining and/or walk away..
Do you understand that people who are displeased are generally the ones who bother to tell their opinion? That's why you see everyone complaining and possibly mistake majority for a vocal minority. What majority of people wants is an enigma.
On June 01 2015 07:34 CptMarvel wrote: Corruptor is one of the units that were wrongly designed up from the get-go. Hard to do anything smart with it now. Just watched a short video on the Liberator... daaamn it looks ugly ! and the attack animations are so bad I'm lost for words. I don't even feel like the unit is interesting. Uncool stuff Blizzard. Uncool indeed.
Just saw on patch notes comments from a blue saying that the corrupter should actually still have caustic spray and they did not intend on removing it.
On June 01 2015 15:52 Ingvar wrote: Do you understand that people who are displeased are generally the ones who bother to tell their opinion? That's why you see everyone complaining and possibly mistake majority for a vocal minority. What majority of people wants is an enigma.
You know there's a problem when the silent majority silently leaves. SC2 is lucky it has a vocal minority. When a game doesn't even have them, it is well and truely DED GAEM.
*blah blah blah the liberator is overpowered... blah blah blah *blah blah blah the liberator is underpowered... blah blah blah
Don't you realize it is a beta and its stats will be tweaked? Honestly some of you sound like you are going to quit the game because a beta unit is not quite like you want it at this moment.
Stop being drama-queens.
People are just frustrated that all Blizzard does is throw some toys at us instead of finally starting public experiments on core game mechanics. Given the dawning realization that Godot will never come and the fact that the new toy is even bugged to the point of working completely different than intended people are upset and need to bash something. So they bash the new toy.
Personally, I am upset because they refuse to make mech viable since WoL. With mech I mean positional play centered around the siege tank, not turtling with tanks until you reach a critical mass of ravens or thor/hellion amove timing pushes. I want to be able to slowly push across the map with carefully set up tanks, taking bases and being able to defend them while fending off harass and harassing myself, constantly trying to trade efficiently with my opponent trying to break the push. Unfortunately, tanks are a joke unit. They can't hold a position for their life in SC2. So what does Blizzard do? They give us a disposable single tank shot best used with bio (the mine). After that, they still don't adjust the tank, they give us a mech KITING unit, i.e. a long range bio unit from the factory. After that, they give the tank a new gimmick (medivac pickup) to turn it into a mobile harassment tool (???) instead of letting it do its job. After that, they give us a sky siege unit, instead of adjusting the tank.
You are perfectly well aware that if Blizzard messed with the core mechanics, people would also be up in arms. There. Is. No. Pleasing. This. Crowd. That's why Blizzard doesn't listen to us. Because no matter what they do, it's wrong. I really don't see how you guys don't see this.
A fact of life is that you can't please everybody and that perfection does not exist.. But that doesn't mean Blizzard should give up on trying to please the majority and make as many happy as possible. That's why voicing your opinion and debating inadequacies is good, if they realise that the majority of the community have an issue with the game, they should start listening and doing. Otherwise the majority will just keep complaining and/or walk away..
Do you understand that people who are displeased are generally the ones who bother to tell their opinion? That's why you see everyone complaining and possibly mistake majority for a vocal minority. What majority of people wants is an enigma.
Then Blizzard should make more of an effort to get the opinion of the rest of the community. A quick and easy voting system within Battlenet, SC2 itself or the Beta perhaps. That would surly make things more transparent and we could all guess less about what's going on in the heads of the "average" player, pro, and Blizzard designer.
Did WC3 have as much bitching about terrible mechanics, economy, units etc? Did as many mods get made that tried to totally recreate the original game itself or test out different mechanics, economies, etc to get Blizzard to change their ways? I don't know for sure but I think not...!?
On June 01 2015 07:34 CptMarvel wrote: Corruptor is one of the units that were wrongly designed up from the get-go. Hard to do anything smart with it now. Just watched a short video on the Liberator... daaamn it looks ugly ! and the attack animations are so bad I'm lost for words. I don't even feel like the unit is interesting. Uncool stuff Blizzard. Uncool indeed.
Just saw on patch notes comments from a blue saying that the corrupter should actually still have caustic spray and they did not intend on removing it.
Yes but caustic spray is like really bad and doesn't fit Corruptor at all. Corruptors were literally one of my favorite units from the WoL alpha when I saw videos of them, but they have changed their ability and turned them basically into flying Roaches, tanky units with low dps, we might as well ignore their ability considering how irrelevant it is. At this point it is so bad that adding Devourer back into the game would be a really good idea...
On May 30 2015 17:56 ETisME wrote: I love watching TvP now, way better than hots one. The nerf to marauder, the Adept with disruptor I think have nailed it. All the engagements are intense and very dynamic
I think terran can get a buff somewhere but right now it's awesome to watch.
Yeah I think some of the positive stuff Blizzard are doing is not being focused on. What you describe is addressing some long standing problems - Tier 1 unit-interaction. ie. Nerfing maurauder indirectly buffs Protoss gateway units.
yeah once you get over the bitching/bitching on bitching phrase, you can finally enjoy the game. Hots produced a lot of awesome games and lotv will be way better, especially when they fixed the terrible pvt.
On June 01 2015 07:34 CptMarvel wrote: Corruptor is one of the units that were wrongly designed up from the get-go. Hard to do anything smart with it now. Just watched a short video on the Liberator... daaamn it looks ugly ! and the attack animations are so bad I'm lost for words. I don't even feel like the unit is interesting. Uncool stuff Blizzard. Uncool indeed.
Just saw on patch notes comments from a blue saying that the corrupter should actually still have caustic spray and they did not intend on removing it.
Yes but caustic spray is like really bad and doesn't fit Corruptor at all. Corruptors were literally one of my favorite units from the WoL alpha when I saw videos of them, but they have changed their ability and turned them basically into flying Roaches, tanky units with low dps, we might as well ignore their ability considering how irrelevant it is. At this point it is so bad that adding Devourer back into the game would be a really good idea...
I think that stat-wise, Corruptors are Devourers (High HP, 2 armor) with a Roach-like attack. They could focus in combining both units at the same time.
I think that the high HP and high armor from Corruptors is not bad at all since that allows them to survive in fights and be efficient at their AA role, but HP could be toned down a bit to make the unit more dynamic (more speed, maybe more damage or range, antiground attack, etc.)
On June 01 2015 07:34 CptMarvel wrote: Corruptor is one of the units that were wrongly designed up from the get-go. Hard to do anything smart with it now. Just watched a short video on the Liberator... daaamn it looks ugly ! and the attack animations are so bad I'm lost for words. I don't even feel like the unit is interesting. Uncool stuff Blizzard. Uncool indeed.
Just saw on patch notes comments from a blue saying that the corrupter should actually still have caustic spray and they did not intend on removing it.
Yes but caustic spray is like really bad and doesn't fit Corruptor at all. Corruptors were literally one of my favorite units from the WoL alpha when I saw videos of them, but they have changed their ability and turned them basically into flying Roaches, tanky units with low dps, we might as well ignore their ability considering how irrelevant it is. At this point it is so bad that adding Devourer back into the game would be a really good idea...
I think that stat-wise, Corruptors are Devourers (High HP, 2 armor) with a Roach-like attack. They could focus in combining both units at the same time.
I think that the high HP and high armor from Corruptors is not bad at all since that allows them to survive in fights and be efficient at their AA role, but HP could be toned down a bit to make the unit more dynamic (more speed, maybe more damage or range, antiground attack, etc.)
It seriously needs a revamp of the mechanics.
From my experience, tweaking various stats on the Corrupter, it's one of the few units in the game that cannot easily be tweaked to feel much more rewarding. I think the only way to make this unit really interesting is to give it an interesting ability-kit. Unfortunately Blizzards approach with spambased ability, abilities with no counter play (high damage vs structures) or autocast abilities simply aren't interesting.
On the other hand I have some interesting idea for new abilites to the Corrupter that would completely change the dynamic when the unit is out on the map.
On June 01 2015 07:34 CptMarvel wrote: Corruptor is one of the units that were wrongly designed up from the get-go. Hard to do anything smart with it now. Just watched a short video on the Liberator... daaamn it looks ugly ! and the attack animations are so bad I'm lost for words. I don't even feel like the unit is interesting. Uncool stuff Blizzard. Uncool indeed.
Just saw on patch notes comments from a blue saying that the corrupter should actually still have caustic spray and they did not intend on removing it.
Yes but caustic spray is like really bad and doesn't fit Corruptor at all. Corruptors were literally one of my favorite units from the WoL alpha when I saw videos of them, but they have changed their ability and turned them basically into flying Roaches, tanky units with low dps, we might as well ignore their ability considering how irrelevant it is. At this point it is so bad that adding Devourer back into the game would be a really good idea...
Devourers actually had a quite interesting attack, and had very good synergy with mutas due to it; I wouldn't mind seeing corruptors getting their attack actually, provided they got more expensive as a result. (For anyone not knowing, devourers added an 'acid spores' debuff on their targets that slowed attack speed and added 1 extra damage per spore, up to a possible of 9. Very powerful combined with glaive wurm bounce of mutas.) The beta corruptors were also quite interesting due to their ability to disable turrets, though it was a bit overpowered because of how long it did so. I don't know why they insist of making them so uninteresting. :l
On June 01 2015 07:34 CptMarvel wrote: Corruptor is one of the units that were wrongly designed up from the get-go. Hard to do anything smart with it now. Just watched a short video on the Liberator... daaamn it looks ugly ! and the attack animations are so bad I'm lost for words. I don't even feel like the unit is interesting. Uncool stuff Blizzard. Uncool indeed.
Just saw on patch notes comments from a blue saying that the corrupter should actually still have caustic spray and they did not intend on removing it.
Yes but caustic spray is like really bad and doesn't fit Corruptor at all. Corruptors were literally one of my favorite units from the WoL alpha when I saw videos of them, but they have changed their ability and turned them basically into flying Roaches, tanky units with low dps, we might as well ignore their ability considering how irrelevant it is. At this point it is so bad that adding Devourer back into the game would be a really good idea...
Devourers actually had a quite interesting attack, and had very good synergy with mutas due to it; I wouldn't mind seeing corruptors getting their attack actually, provided they got more expensive as a result. (For anyone not knowing, devourers added an 'acid spores' debuff on their targets that slowed attack speed and added 1 extra damage per spore, up to a possible of 9. Very powerful combined with glaive wurm bounce of mutas.) The beta corruptors were also quite interesting due to their ability to disable turrets, though it was a bit overpowered because of how long it did so. I don't know why they insist of making them so uninteresting. :l
But you have to be carefull adding too much options to corruptors, they are overall the best AA unit in the game, the cost for that is the lack of other roles for the unit.
The best example is the phoenix, it can't do shit against corruptor even though both cost the same and can only hit air. and that is the price for being faster and having GB.
Reading through the comments, I find comfort in the fact that I'm not the only one swimming in disappointment.
But at the same time it is disheartening to see the design team keep up the main problematic theme since early WoL. Minor and conservative changes, while turning an arrogant eye to all the constructive feedback with the usual "we felt that..." punchlines.
HotS was the first Blizzard game I didn't buy and it seems LotV will be the second on that list. Only a miracle can breath new life into SC2 at this point. And this is coming from a very devoted Starcraft fan.
The Liberator is not a unit that can work on its own. It's more of a support unit to a mainly bio army. You really need the mobility of the bio to force the enemy to come within range of the Liberator. Mech/Air compostion just don't work atm, too gas heavy.
This patch is a HUGE NERF to T imo. I'd take combined upgrades over Lib any day. Pure Air T still is not a viable tech tree, too gas heavy, too fragile. The entire T starport units are pretty much trash except medivacs.
On June 01 2015 07:34 CptMarvel wrote: Corruptor is one of the units that were wrongly designed up from the get-go. Hard to do anything smart with it now. Just watched a short video on the Liberator... daaamn it looks ugly ! and the attack animations are so bad I'm lost for words. I don't even feel like the unit is interesting. Uncool stuff Blizzard. Uncool indeed.
Just saw on patch notes comments from a blue saying that the corrupter should actually still have caustic spray and they did not intend on removing it.
Yes but caustic spray is like really bad and doesn't fit Corruptor at all. Corruptors were literally one of my favorite units from the WoL alpha when I saw videos of them, but they have changed their ability and turned them basically into flying Roaches, tanky units with low dps, we might as well ignore their ability considering how irrelevant it is. At this point it is so bad that adding Devourer back into the game would be a really good idea...
Devourers actually had a quite interesting attack, and had very good synergy with mutas due to it; I wouldn't mind seeing corruptors getting their attack actually, provided they got more expensive as a result. (For anyone not knowing, devourers added an 'acid spores' debuff on their targets that slowed attack speed and added 1 extra damage per spore, up to a possible of 9. Very powerful combined with glaive wurm bounce of mutas.) The beta corruptors were also quite interesting due to their ability to disable turrets, though it was a bit overpowered because of how long it did so. I don't know why they insist of making them so uninteresting. :l
This sounds cool. The acid spore from be would probably be to strong if copied directly, but maybe we can get a light version of it. Like only the armour debuff and down to a minimum of armour 0. Would still make muta-corruptor very strong I think, and pure corruptor less so maybe, due to the slow attack speed.
On May 28 2015 04:45 IntoTheheart wrote: Is there sufficient design space for Terran to have both a Viking and the Liberator? They're both primarily air-to-air combat units and have a separate mode for ground-based combat.
Vikings are used to snipe armored/big targets from afar. Including colossus and Broodlords (or even Battlecruisers, Tempests). The Liberator will be an anti-flock unit, to kill mutalisks, phoenixes, vikings, corruptors.. overall cheaper lighter air units.
The liberator is also an air-to-ground siege unit, where the viking is a ground-to-ground single target unit. Big differences.
Vikings is primarily anti-Collossi. Against Brood Lords and Carriers Vikings are pretty bad imo.
BLs usually have Infestors or Vipers support and Vikings are horrible against those. One fungal or Pbomb on your Viking cloud and it's instant GG. Vikings are extremely fragile and they don't really trade well with corruptors either so it's not a good idea to make them against Zerg.(make Cyclones instead cuz they can't be hit by Pbomb)
As for Mass Carriers, the launched interceptors just rape Vikings so never try to counter carriers with Vikings. Cyclones are pretty bad against Carriers too so make WM or Liberator. Again the seperated upgrades hurt so much here. It's a pretty rare situation and you have plenty of time to react so just don't make Vikings in TVP.(nobody goes mass Collosi anymore)
On June 01 2015 07:34 CptMarvel wrote: Corruptor is one of the units that were wrongly designed up from the get-go. Hard to do anything smart with it now. Just watched a short video on the Liberator... daaamn it looks ugly ! and the attack animations are so bad I'm lost for words. I don't even feel like the unit is interesting. Uncool stuff Blizzard. Uncool indeed.
Just saw on patch notes comments from a blue saying that the corrupter should actually still have caustic spray and they did not intend on removing it.
Yes but caustic spray is like really bad and doesn't fit Corruptor at all. Corruptors were literally one of my favorite units from the WoL alpha when I saw videos of them, but they have changed their ability and turned them basically into flying Roaches, tanky units with low dps, we might as well ignore their ability considering how irrelevant it is. At this point it is so bad that adding Devourer back into the game would be a really good idea...
I think that stat-wise, Corruptors are Devourers (High HP, 2 armor) with a Roach-like attack. They could focus in combining both units at the same time.
I think that the high HP and high armor from Corruptors is not bad at all since that allows them to survive in fights and be efficient at their AA role, but HP could be toned down a bit to make the unit more dynamic (more speed, maybe more damage or range, antiground attack, etc.)
It seriously needs a revamp of the mechanics.
That's my point. Devourers were even more tanky than Corruptors but their mechanic and ability was really good in my opinion and you didn't have to mass them unless you are going up against heavy heavy air(mass Battle Cruisers/Carriers with other air units). Corruptors stat wise aren't bad it is just that their ability feels so irrelevant that their stats are the only thing you see(unlike Devourers that were used mostly for their ability) and like that they represent flying Roaches more than anything else...
On June 01 2015 07:34 CptMarvel wrote: Corruptor is one of the units that were wrongly designed up from the get-go. Hard to do anything smart with it now. Just watched a short video on the Liberator... daaamn it looks ugly ! and the attack animations are so bad I'm lost for words. I don't even feel like the unit is interesting. Uncool stuff Blizzard. Uncool indeed.
Just saw on patch notes comments from a blue saying that the corrupter should actually still have caustic spray and they did not intend on removing it.
Yes but caustic spray is like really bad and doesn't fit Corruptor at all. Corruptors were literally one of my favorite units from the WoL alpha when I saw videos of them, but they have changed their ability and turned them basically into flying Roaches, tanky units with low dps, we might as well ignore their ability considering how irrelevant it is. At this point it is so bad that adding Devourer back into the game would be a really good idea...
Devourers actually had a quite interesting attack, and had very good synergy with mutas due to it; I wouldn't mind seeing corruptors getting their attack actually, provided they got more expensive as a result. (For anyone not knowing, devourers added an 'acid spores' debuff on their targets that slowed attack speed and added 1 extra damage per spore, up to a possible of 9. Very powerful combined with glaive wurm bounce of mutas.) The beta corruptors were also quite interesting due to their ability to disable turrets, though it was a bit overpowered because of how long it did so. I don't know why they insist of making them so uninteresting. :l
It was interesting, Devourer was literally my second favorite unit in BW(first one was Lurker) and I would love to see him back, the reason I wrote "adding Devourer back into the game would be a reall good idea..." was because I don't believe that Blizzard wants to add any of the old units to the game, especially not in their known form.
Alpha Corruptors if you all have forgotten got special ability to corrupt units that it has killed, so it was creating a "flying turrets" out of enemy air units. That could be too strong of course, but it would also feel a lot more Zergy than the current version and it could be balanced. Like Phoenixes and Vikings, it would also be an anti-air unit that has some impact against ground units as those "flying turrets" were able to shoot the ground units.
I really don't care about stuff being too strong, it's what the beta is for. But Zerg early game is the same as HoTS and WoL again.. Like please don't make the game more dull every patch.. Don't overnerf the shit out of everything that's fun
On June 01 2015 15:01 friendship wrote: Seems like the reasoning is this: Blizzard separates the upgrades and brings in a strong air unit. Not really to compliment mech but to give a mainly air army (besides mass raven) a chance. Since it's beta I guess they want to see how people optimize various unit comps-- i.e. if mostly mech what and how much anti-air do you use or if going airmech how many hellios are in your army etc.
The complaints seem to be focused around now 'needing' a ton of armories and upgrades whirling away so that air and mech together are viable-- contrary to what blizzard is saying regarding 2 distinct and viable techpaths. Needing to make certain strategic prioritization has been a part of teching for all 3 races the whole time. This is just trying to squeeze out a 3rd option for terran which is what has been asked for.
It's one thing to use the change to see what pure Mech and pure Skyterran look like by forcing it, but your second paragraph doesn't include the fact that you can still go Skyterran just as easily if its upgrades are shared with Mech (not counting the untested possibility of Skymech being straight-up better than full Skyterran or Mech).
So really, the two distinct options were already there. Skymech and Mech with air support, however, are not as effective as before. It's not a "3rd option" more than it's the loss of a "4th option," and the option to transition between Mech and Sky becoming harder.
The thing is, I personally believe every composition should have an element of "air dominance" available to it -- not necessarily air by itself with ground forces being more difficult to incorporate into it, or vice-versa. I'm fine with a full-air composition, but giving a ground composition little in terms of air support options eliminates an interesting dynamic of the game. And I'm not saying Mech shouldn't be able to stand on it's own without air, but that it should at least have the option of air support without having to make great sacrifices.
Additionally, forcing distinct playstyles by eliminating tools from other playstyles is not the ideal approach to "creating" playstyles, IMO. I believe you should have tools that are all useful but also unique, so that they can be mixed and matched to be used in different ways together. The ideal tool mixtures, or compositions, will work themselves out naturally. Bio units are tools that have high mobility and high low-burst DPS, but low health. Having to stick around Tanks limits their full mobility potential and their low health makes them more susceptible to friendly splash, so usually Bio compositions don't include Tanks (though there are exceptions here and there where Tanks are used as anchor points). All-air compositions have a natural synergy, being able to essentially ignore terrain obstacles and cliffs, so there are benefits of leaving out ground units without having to split upgrades. Pure ground compositions are meant to not need air units, so not worrying about the need for air superiority is a plus for them. But of course there are also obvious benefits to mixing ground and air units. It's a matter of playstyle if you have the proper tools available.
If Blizzard is set on forcing Barracks, Factory, and Starport away from each other, then the Medivac/Tank ability seems pretty counter-intuitive.
Now, maybe it's not actually that hard to have Skymech -- compare to Protoss, which in some situations and strategies can mix ground and air forces fairly easily despite air upgrades being separate from ground (aside from Sheilds, which seems like kind of a weak bridge between the ground and air Protoss forces, particularly in the lategame). But from the sounds of it, it is harder for Terran to do this with split upgrades. Maybe time will tell otherwise, but splitting upgrades does not create (or buff) anything besides limits, it simply puts more constraints on composition mixtures.
This makes balance the only real reason for upgrade splitting to me. Not that units can't be balanced with upgrade sharing, but that they cannot live up to their full potential and be balanced without upgrade splitting. But this is also why sharing one upgrade and not the other could be fine -- even if shared weapon upgrades would be imbalanced, that doesn't mean shared armor upgrades would, and vice versa. It's simply a matter of finding out whether the better balanced design for a group of units (in this case Barracks, Factory, and Starport are the groups) is limiting their synergy with other unit groups while making them stronger individually within their own group, or making them weaker individually while increasing their synergy with other unit groups.
I think it goes without saying that forcing a race to commit more to a given tech path by choosing upgrades specific to said tech path is not supposed to make it easier for said race to go for a different tech path at the same time. In this case, maybe there is an argument where some synergy between the two can be reached with a common upgrade, or a unit that fills a gap--
I recall styles (especially zerg ones) that include basically every lairtech ground unit with almost no upgrades because of unit synergies-- not saying it's optimal. If the game goes on some choices have to be made for the unit comp he's going for-- e.g. he's getting +x melee but his army is mostly roach, wonder whats next? Or terran's getting some bio upgrades and all we see are unupgraded hellions, hmm...
Opening tech trees and then expecting a player to commit to one isn't a nerf on its own. If no new unit was coming out in conjunction (one that has been designed to make a pure air style viable) then yes, it'd be a nerf. It's certainly a nerf to the current HOTS mech with vikings or banshee style I'll concede that. But if you add a new unit why not start by seeing if it can fulfill the purpose it was originally designed for before relegating it to a support role within the existing 'standard' mech comp? It's like if we remove the voidray from the game, maybe we could consider combining some robo and air upgrades for protoss-- or in a world without mutas maybe zergs shouldn't have separate melee and ranged attack upgrades.
I think it goes without saying that forcing a race to commit more to a given tech path by choosing upgrades specific to said tech path is not supposed to make it easier for said race to go for a different tech path at the same time. In this case, maybe there is an argument where some synergy between the two can be reached with a common upgrade, or a unit that fills a gap--
I recall styles (especially zerg ones) that include basically every lairtech ground unit with almost no upgrades because of unit synergies-- not saying it's optimal. If the game goes on some choices have to be made for the unit comp he's going for-- e.g. he's getting +x melee but his army is mostly roach, wonder whats next? Or terran's getting some bio upgrades and all we see are unupgraded hellions, hmm...
Opening tech trees and then expecting a player to commit to one isn't a nerf on its own. If no new unit was coming out in conjunction (one that has been designed to make a pure air style viable) then yes, it'd be a nerf. It's certainly a nerf to the current HOTS mech with vikings or banshee style I'll concede that. But if you add a new unit why not start by seeing if it can fulfill the purpose it was originally designed for before relegating it to a support role within the existing 'standard' mech comp? It's like if we remove the voidray from the game, maybe we could consider combining some robo and air upgrades for protoss-- or in a world without mutas maybe zergs shouldn't have separate melee and ranged attack upgrades.
Except, it isn't, sure if a comp is good enough being a commitment isn a big nerf, but it is, a nerf, wich is the big problem with split upgrades its simply a balance nerf, not design change.
SC2 mech is a very special kind of comp, its created a very slow pace, with a very expensive production, very gas heavy with late upgrades (gas army cost+armory cost+upgrade cost), its a very all around composition (zerg tech switches for example are something mech has been weak against) you a large amount of units, like any other composition, but unlike other compositions its not easy to get to that spot. You need a large amount of thors to not die to magic box, a large amount of tanks to not die to a full surround, etc.
This was overcomed with starport units, you could use a good sense and have very diverse compositions that could work in conjunction, like Bbyongs hellbat/thor/banshee or ForGGs squads of viking/banshee or heavy medivac/hellbat tvt mech, or ForGGs hellion/viking, etc.
This is the problem with mech, without starport units you can only get factory units (obviously) and this is a problem, you can't simply go out on the map with it like you could with HotS mech, you can't do pushes unless you have a big amount of thors to stop a big muta switch or a critic tank mass to not die to 100 supply of roaches, so you have to turtle, wich with the new economy is not really posible. So you are forced to get both factory and mech units to survive since commiting to just factory units is not possible but then again the new economy is very punishing since mech units is expensive, and getting upgrades is harder for mech than for other compositions.
So in the end my guess is that blizzard wants bio to be the standard unit composition in the game and THEN make the choice to either get factory units or starport units as a transition, because going mech is no longer posible.
You make some good points, and I think the last paragraph I added essentially deals with what you are saying -- in more specific terms of what you are saying, would a unit (or group of units, say Starport units in this case) really be reduced to support and specialist roles if they shared upgrades with another group of units (Factory units in this case)? Or is it possible for them also to be core/key units in a different composition though they are support units in another? Or could they be core/key units in both compositions?
If upgrade sharing limits the potential to be key units in the composition they were designed for (in this case, Liberator for Starport), then by all means, split the upgrades. But this could limit its ability to aid other compositions (Liberator for Mech, for instance), which could be solved by sharing upgrades. So really the question is, if it shared upgrades (or an upgrade), would it be able to fulfill a key role in one and a support role in another? I think it could be balanced for such. At the same time, perhaps it could still be a good support tool without sharing upgrades -- for instance, the Liberator seems to be working well with Bio so far against certain things. Bio/Cyclone is another example. (I don't consider Bio/Mine and the fact that Bio includes Medivacs as good examples as Mines and Medivacs work in spells/abilities which aren't significantly affected by weapon/armor upgrades).
This also goes back to the part I added about the natural synergy of certain compositions. Again as an example, air units work very well with each other because they aren't limited by terrain. And airless ground compositions don't need to invest in air superiority (this isn't seen often, but Bio/Mine I think is one exception where often Vikings aren't seen at all against some compositions that have air units, also HTOMario has showcased a "moar Tanks" style in TvT where his superior ground forces and positioning outweighed the opponent's air superiority, essentially making most of the opponent's Vikings wasted resources). Yet air units can still be used as support units for ground units and vice-versa due to reasons outside of terrain limitations and air/ground army balance (though in some cases the purpose of air units in a ground composition is for vision of high ground and far terrain for ground units, or for transporting ground units over and around obstacles). I don't see why an air unit can't at the same time be more powerful in the context of a full air army while sharing upgrades for the sake of their ground support capabilities.
Again, though, I also don't know yet if shared upgrades are actually necessary for Starport units to be good support for Mech and vice-versa.
so far I sort of like the liberator. it's a fun unit to play against, except that it does everything to well. It destroys anything in the air and its ground attack while slow is strong. I think blizzard needs to decide which nitch is should do well, and nerf the other attack. That way it isn't an all around unit. The problem I have with it right now is It counters every toss air unit (except tempist, but it can still chase them down and kill them quite easily.) dodging it's ground attack with your army allows for some micro which is fun. but it feels dumb when even with good micro high templar can't outrun the attack.
It feels necessary to clear my throat a bit, I am not saying that shared upgrades would necessarily be imbalanced. I am proposing that the change to split them shows a promising development for how terran unit comps are addressed by blizzard. If later this proves challenging or not viable it should be easy enough to make a change.
Probably there are other, more interesting ways to promote hybrid unit comps around mech with starport HOTS style or starport core with a few mech support units-- e.g. making factories and starports capable of transforming into the other for a cost; or allowing 2 upgrades per armory to be researched at the same time yielding a faster research rate than 1 at a time but slower than 1 in each armory. Something more interesting than the quick fix of combining the upgrades belongs in the beta imho-- though to be honest I'd say theres a pretty high chance the combined upgrades will be back soon enough if the air comps prove less popular than blizzard is hoping for.
I don't buy the mech shared upgrade argument. For zerg and protoss to incorporate air units into the mix the ground and air upgrades are separate, 4 for zeg if he focuses on either ground melee or ranged, 5 for protoss no getting around that. Why is it fair that terran mech only needs 2 upgrades total when other races need 4-5?
If the argument is that mech pure ground doesn't work and you need air support to be viable, isn't the real problem source at the design of mech ground? Combining upgrades is a cheap way to fix balance issues isn't it? "Your units suck so you need half the upgrades that other races need?!"
As for muta switch, by the time mutas come out terran already has 1-1, and by the time terran has 2-2, unupgraded mutas can't do anything in a fight. Also the liberator shuts down mutas even without air upgrades, i just don't see why mech needs half the upgrades of other races.
If bio mech ever become a thing, it may be fair for mech to share armor upgrade with attack still separate so all races have 5 total upgrades, but as long as bio vs mech is a binary choice, terran already require the least number of upgrades as is.
Yes, it's 5 upgrades for the protoss tech tree (because of the shield, it's 4 otherwise). It's 5 upgrades for the zerg tech tree (they get "combined" carapace melee upgrade) It's 6 for terran. In order to make it worse, 4 of them must be searched in an expensive building (evo chamber and forge are cheap in comparison) and buildings upgrade are in the ebay so if you want them fast you need a 3rd one (wich nobody does anyway).
So as you say, other races need 5 upgrades and cheap buildings. Why would terran need 6 and expensive research facilities ?
On June 03 2015 04:48 ganil wrote: Yes, it's 5 upgrades for the protoss tech tree (because of the shield, it's 4 otherwise). It's 5 upgrades for the zerg tech tree (they get "combined" carapace melee upgrade) It's 6 for terran. In order to make it worse, 4 of them must be searched in an expensive building (evo chamber and forge are cheap in comparison) and buildings upgrade are in the ebay so if you want them fast you need a 3rd one (wich nobody does anyway).
So as you say, other races need 5 upgrades and cheap buildings. Why would terran need 6 and expensive research facilities ?
Like i said, if bio mech becomes meta, i think mech armor upgrade can be shared so terran has 5 total, right now mech and bio is binary, so most games you only need 2. I can't recall any games where terran got all 6 upgrades, whereas protoss and zerg frequently needs to get 4-5.
One example is viking and corrupter vs colosus, zerg needs to invest in air upgrades separate from ground to buff corrupters, why should vikings share mech ground upgrades for free? Both units are made to solve one problem that is colosus, one race require more upgrades is fair?
As for armory being expensive, the spire cost even more gas, and zerg going heavy air needs 2 spires on top of evo chamber upgrades. Forge and cybercore are mineral only, so you have a fair point there that armory is expensive vs protoss. Even then, armory unlocks units, all races have expensive buildings that don't do anything except unlocking units/ progress the tech tree. In bio armory is often made just to get some hellbats or unupgraded thors.
Your argument would make sense if bio and much had shared upgrades, then it would be like protoss with ground shared upgrade. And shield is ON TOP OF ARMOR AND WEAPON. it's an advantage upgrade so don't count it like some kind of drawback.
On June 03 2015 04:48 ganil wrote: Yes, it's 5 upgrades for the protoss tech tree (because of the shield, it's 4 otherwise). It's 5 upgrades for the zerg tech tree (they get "combined" carapace melee upgrade) It's 6 for terran. In order to make it worse, 4 of them must be searched in an expensive building (evo chamber and forge are cheap in comparison) and buildings upgrade are in the ebay so if you want them fast you need a 3rd one (wich nobody does anyway).
So as you say, other races need 5 upgrades and cheap buildings. Why would terran need 6 and expensive research facilities ?
Except Zerg still need Lair and then Hive to unlock their higher upgrades and spire is then needed for air upgrades; Protoss needs Twilight to unlock tier 2 and 3 and cybernetics core is needed for air.
On June 03 2015 07:09 The_Masked_Shrimp wrote: Your argument would make sense if bio and much had shared upgrades, then it would be like protoss with ground shared upgrade. And shield is ON TOP OF ARMOR AND WEAPON. it's an advantage upgrade so don't count it like some kind of drawback.
Do you understand how Protoss upgrades work? Armor upgrades don't work until after shields have been used up. You have to upgrade shield and armor to get what terran or zerg get from 1 armor upgrade
On June 03 2015 07:09 The_Masked_Shrimp wrote: Your argument would make sense if bio and much had shared upgrades, then it would be like protoss with ground shared upgrade. And shield is ON TOP OF ARMOR AND WEAPON. it's an advantage upgrade so don't count it like some kind of drawback.
Maybe they should alter the thor a little bit to make it resemble/act more like a goliath. This way mech should get decent AA and there will be no need for both upgrades to be shared (ground/air). The thor has always been one of my least favourite units anyway. I've never been excited when a thor enters the battle.
I don't buy the mech shared upgrade argument. For zerg and protoss to incorporate air units into the mix the ground and air upgrades are separate, 4 for zeg if he focuses on either ground melee or ranged, 5 for protoss no getting around that. Why is it fair that terran mech only needs 2 upgrades total when other races need 4-5?
You might as well ask why aren't robo and gateway upgrades split into two? Terran actually has a total of 6 different upgrades. Zerg and toss only 5. That simply doesn't make sense when you take into account that terran has the most inflexible production, so if you want to balance the game around more unit diversity --> Don't make it very costly when you want to switch to a different tech route is the way to go.
On June 03 2015 07:09 The_Masked_Shrimp wrote: Your argument would make sense if bio and much had shared upgrades, then it would be like protoss with ground shared upgrade. And shield is ON TOP OF ARMOR AND WEAPON. it's an advantage upgrade so don't count it like some kind of drawback.
Worst. Argument. Ever.
Ahaha, clear sign that the discussion is entering a mentality where you can arrive at any conclusion. :D
BASED ON MY CALCULATION ZERG SHOULD HAVE ONLY ONE UPGRADE FOR ALL UNITS: ARMOUR AND ATTACK!!! IT IS ONLY FAIR! > : (
On June 03 2015 07:09 The_Masked_Shrimp wrote: Your argument would make sense if bio and much had shared upgrades, then it would be like protoss with ground shared upgrade. And shield is ON TOP OF ARMOR AND WEAPON. it's an advantage upgrade so don't count it like some kind of drawback.
Shield upgrades are like armor but for a % of the life of the units. If a siege tank has 160HP, armor is applied for the total health.
However, if a stalker has 80HP + 80shields, armor only applies on the HP, and you have to wait for shield upgrades to be fully armored for the total health. Consider that because burst damage units (marines, marauders) scale very well vs protoss since shield upgrades are so rare.
Having shield upgrade is having armor upgrade split in 2, not an advantage.
On June 03 2015 19:50 weikor wrote: Why not reduce the cost of the armory to 50 gas?, i mean - thats what they wanted to accomplish anyway?
That would make certain timing attacks more lethal. By game design they want u to dump that much gas before u can get stuff like Thors or Helbats. So making Armory capable of researching 2 upgrades at the same time will make the game as close as possible. Maybe add restriction that you can't research Mech attack and armor at the same time.(can research Mech attack and Air attack the same time)
I think people have missed the fact that there is a dynamic between the amount of upgrades and the strength and synergy of units. Terran has more upgrades because they possess the greatest potency in terms of inter-unit potency. Their army flows much better when going inbetween compositions (Think viking-mine-medivac composition and marine-marauder ratio). Zerg has fewer upgrades because their tech trees are weaker areas other than their respective advantages. Protoss upgrades are fewer generally because of the price of protoss units, and also that their different tech paths are strictly augmentive to Gateway.
It's impossible to analyse the situation fixing the power of the units of all races and then argue that Terran is worse off because they have 6 upgrades as opposed to 5.
On June 03 2015 22:11 TokO wrote: I think people have missed the fact that there is a dynamic between the amount of upgrades and the strength and synergy of units. Terran has more upgrades because they possess the greatest potency in terms of inter-unit potency. Their army flows much better when going inbetween compositions (Think viking-mine-medivac composition and marine-marauder ratio). Zerg has fewer upgrades because their tech trees are weaker areas other than their respective advantages. Protoss upgrades are fewer generally because of the price of protoss units, and also that their different tech paths are strictly augmentive to Gateway.
It's impossible to analyse the situation fixing the power of the units of all races and then argue that Terran is worse off because they have 6 upgrades as opposed to 5.
This makes no sense! Protoss units have a ton better synergy between Robo and Gateway, and zerg has much better synergy between Speedlings, Roaches, Hydras than terran has between mech and starport. You would only get Vikings becasue you needed it as anti-air, but Mech/Viking has never been considered to be OP (only when you mix in PDD).
The only way this change could make remotely sense is if they want liberator + bio to be viable and they think that liberator + mech would be op if shared ups still exist. But again, why not directly write that, and more relevant, is that even true at all? Why not test it at least?
It's just a change that doesn't have any sound reasoning behind it, and the only reason people support is because it was like that in Brood War.
Hider is right, this is obviously just a balance change, they just think mech is too strong and/or don't want mech to be played as is, you simply can't mech alone since factory units aren't very well rounded. This change won't "give player choices", thats like when they nerfed the mine and said it was because they wanted players to choose betwen mines and tanks, that didn't happened because tanks were shit, so this is simply a nerf to mech no other way around it.
But I can see where they are comming from, the community has said that "mech is boring" and that they want "bio to have a lategame" so they added the liberator and Split the upgrades so when you go bio you can add Factory and starport units as the game goes on but you can't simply "go mech" anymore.
This will erase one of the few traits of terran gameplay (the bio - mech dichotomy) and make terran like the other races, but if that is what people wanted then I guess thats that, maybe they are listening then?
thats like when they nerfed the mine and said it was because they wanted players to choose betwen mines and tanks, that didn't happened because tanks were !@#$%^&*, so this is simply a nerf to mech no other way around it.
What they said back then was that they wanted Mines + Tanks to be used together, but the two units just didn't have any synergy together, so that was pretty easy to see that it never was gonna be the case.
But I can see where they are comming from, the community has said that "mech is boring" and that they want "bio to have a lategame" so they added the liberator and Split the upgrades so when you go bio you can add Factory and starport units as the game goes on but you can't simply "go mech" anymore.
Hmm and I guess people can still use the tank as it synergizes better with bio due to medivac pick up. And Cyclone's role as a hardcore to units that cannot catch up to it (e.g. Ultras).
Unfortunately, I think most people aren't that much into those changes. Sure if you are already playing Sc2, you will be like "yeh awesome i can mix in more units with my bio", but it's not a change that is gonna make poeple who quit 1-2 years ago come back to play it.
I think more people want standard mech to be viable, and then they give the mech players opportunites to harass while the opponent should have tools to break down a turtling mech player. And part of mech's harass options comes through the starport which no longer is as attractive an option. This is why heavy mech focussed play will likely be very turtlish whenever anyone attempts to try it.
On June 03 2015 22:11 TokO wrote: I think people have missed the fact that there is a dynamic between the amount of upgrades and the strength and synergy of units. Terran has more upgrades because they possess the greatest potency in terms of inter-unit potency. Their army flows much better when going inbetween compositions (Think viking-mine-medivac composition and marine-marauder ratio). Zerg has fewer upgrades because their tech trees are weaker areas other than their respective advantages. Protoss upgrades are fewer generally because of the price of protoss units, and also that their different tech paths are strictly augmentive to Gateway.
It's impossible to analyse the situation fixing the power of the units of all races and then argue that Terran is worse off because they have 6 upgrades as opposed to 5.
This makes no sense! Protoss units have a ton better synergy between Robo and Gateway, and zerg has much better synergy between Speedlings, Roaches, Hydras than terran has between mech and starport. You would only get Vikings becasue you needed it as anti-air, but Mech/Viking has never been considered to be OP (only when you mix in PDD).
The only way this change could make remotely sense is if they want liberator + bio to be viable and they think that liberator + mech would be op if shared ups still exist. But again, why not directly write that, and more relevant, is that even true at all? Why not test it at least?
It's just a change that doesn't have any sound reasoning behind it, and the only reason people support is because it was like that in Brood War.
Necessity =/= Synergy. I have to disagree with the Speedling Roach Hydra argument, the power of those compositions tend to come from macro advantages rather than strength of the composition itself. It's the same as the zealots on PvZ for example, once lines become thich enough melee's melt to the units in the backline who would otherwise have trouble shooting.
The fact that you have a myriad of compositions mixing factory and starport together with bio in the mid-game for example in TvT and TvZ owes to the fact that your units synergize well. And I think that's what makes Terran match-ups the best ones. Choosing an arbitrary composition and saying that it's not OP (Which I never claimed) doesn't make my argument wrong. I don't think there is a lack of synergy in the Terran arsenal, and we shouldn't pretend that it's not an advantage for Terran (We can disagree about that though).
While I agree that Blizzard tend to do things without good reasons, I prefer the 6 upgrades for Terran. It might just be because it was like that in BW (This is not the only reason), because it adds uniqueness to the race, it opens up the possibility of making Terran sligtly stronger at the expense of having separated upgrades, as well as the argument above. I think it could be good to try to see things in other ways than the separation only being due to the introduction of the Liberator.
The fact that you have a myriad of compositions mixing factory and starport together with bio in the mid-game for example in TvT and TvZ owes to the fact that your units synergize well.
Past the early game, you see Vikings and tanks in tvt along with bio (occationally banshee). You see Mines and bio in TvZ. You See Vikings vs Colossus and Mines vs toss.
I don't know how you think this is such huge diversification. I see protoss players and zerg players mixing more units togeter.
Remember, when you are talking in favor of removing shared ups, you are implying that mixing in starport units and mech units would become too imbalanced in LOTV. There is no support behind that theory!
because it adds uniqueness to the race,
Here is a different way of making the race unique. Make only two upgrades that benefit both air, bio and starport units!!! This way you surely get a lot more diversification in terms of unit compositions, and you can balance the game in different ways around this. Not saying that blizzard should go this way, but it imo makes a lot more sense than the 6-upgrade approach if you are looking for uniqueness.
Terran sligtly stronger at the expense of having separated upgrades
I am still waiting for the tank buff, or what about Banshee upgrade requiring Fusion Core? How exactly does an indirect nerf to banshees in the midgame (where they are rarely seen anyway) and first compensate them with a lategame upgrade, create more interesting gameplay?
If Blizzard on the other hand a specific plan for how they see each unit fit into every matchups, and then would argue why shared ups would be problematic, I could sympathize more with their decision (even though I still probably wouldn't agree).
Or why couldn't we argue that more shared ups opens up for the opportunity to buff zerg and toss in various ways while taking into account that terran has inflexibility prodution and thus needs more shared upgrades than zerg and protoss (not fewer).
It might just be because it was like that in BW (
I believe that simple + damage/armor upgrades are an ancient idea that shouldn't be part of future RTS games. Upgrades should be more about changing the playstyle of certain units or have specific balance purposes. But +1 armor/weapon upgrades does neither.
They are a pointless complexity in my opinion, and while that doesn't imply Blizzard should remove all upgrades in LOTV (obviously unrealistic), I am of the opinion that you might as well use every opportunity to minimize the amount of "pointless" stuff in the game. Balancing the game around more upgrades is imo a step back for the genre.
I believe that simple + damage/armor upgrades are an ancient idea that shouldn't be part of future RTS games. Upgrades should be more about changing the playstyle of certain units or have specific balance purposes. But +1 armor/weapon upgrades does neither.
They are a pointless complexity in my opinion, and while that doesn't imply Blizzard should remove all upgrades in LOTV (obviously unrealistic), I am of the opinion that you might as well use every opportunity to minimize the amount of "pointless" stuff in the game. Balancing the game around more upgrades is imo a step back for the genre.
I don't think it is bad to have them, specially if they modify a bit the numerical interactions between them, like Zealots and Zerglings, Roaches and Zerglings, Zealots and Marines.... Having an upgrade lead heavily modifies the strength of that units in your favor. Also it helps balancing some units that might be too powerful early game by scaling them stronger late game.
It helps with balance and gives an interesting addition to plan macro a bit. It is true that +1 is dull most of the times and doesn't make much sense (it doesn't change the outcome as long as enemy has the same level of upgrades), but having a unit scalling +2 or +5 is very significant.
The way to fix ground mech is to buff ground mech, not to make air transition easier with shared upgrades, that's just flat out saying ground mech sucks and nothing will be done about it. Why can't people see that? Push for better ground mech balance like siege tank buff or something, getting stronger banshees with shared upgrades is not the solution..
With shared upgrades, terran air transition is way more powerful than zerg and protoss air transition. One can argue that terran mech ground needs air transition more than zerg or protoss ground need air transition, but that means the problem lies with mech geound balance.
The fact that you have a myriad of compositions mixing factory and starport together with bio in the mid-game for example in TvT and TvZ owes to the fact that your units synergize well.
Past the early game, you see Vikings and tanks in tvt along with bio (occationally banshee). You see Mines and bio in TvZ. You See Vikings vs Colossus and Mines vs toss.
I don't know how you think this is such huge diversification. I see protoss players and zerg players mixing more units togeter.
We're obviously talking about different games, so there's no point to arguing. I guess you're right!
The way to fix ground mech is to buff ground mech, not to make air transition easier with shared upgrades
Yes that's true. Mech should have a strong core compositions through tanks/thors/hellions. But that doesn't imply that the occational mech/air game can't be interesting as well, and one way to encourage more diversity is through shared upgrades.
The problem is that people assume that tanks can't get a buff if shared upgrades exist in the game. Like they are mutually exclusive for some reason. But that's only the case with a dumb OP PDD. Blizzard has already stated that they are working on a new ability as replacement for PDD.
Remember, when the Cyclone shot up for free and early, ground mech was in fact the go to comp. Hellion/Cyclone was the dominant build when mech had mobile and effective single target AA.
On June 04 2015 02:35 CannonsNCarriers wrote: Remember, when the Cyclone shot up for free and early, ground mech was in fact the go to comp. Hellion/Cyclone was the dominant build when mech had mobile and effective single target AA.
Yeah and people couldn't stand the idea of a mobile mech that can move out before being maxed out on 3 base turtle or could not be cheesed out by a single proxy oracle without blindly commuting to a building +turrets
I think DK removed AA for earlly game cyclone because he wants Banshee opening to be viable. Banshee would be the worst unit in the game by far if its only use as TvT opener is taken away.
On June 04 2015 19:23 HallofPain4444 wrote: I think DK removed AA for earlly game cyclone because he wants Banshee opening to be viable. Banshee would be the worst unit in the game by far if its only use as TvT opener is taken away.
Cyclone AA was taken away because it hard-countered almost all of the opening air units from each race. Mothership Core, Banshees, Oracles, Mutas and Void Rays are just wiped out before they can do anything and even if you manage to catch Cyclones off-guard they will trade very very efficiently.
How long could it possibly take them to fix the liberator bug? How are they expecting us to test a unit when it is working completely different than intended? How could they release the unit when the bug is even visible in the unit's official introduction video?
Another indicator that Blizzard is pushing LotV out with minimal resources and quality control and will then move on to games that make money.
On June 04 2015 21:10 dust7 wrote: How long could it possibly take them to fix the liberator bug? How are they expecting us to test a unit when it is working completely different than intended? How could they release the unit when the bug is even visible in the unit's official introduction video?
Another indicator that Blizzard is pushing LotV out with minimal resources and quality control and will then move on to games that make money.
They don't seem to care at all about LotV atm. Mind you, I don't care anymore too. So far every patch has been hugely underwhelming, borderline irrelevant, when not straight detrimental. I have lost hope. At this point I'm pretty sure the game will be far worse than HotS -if they don't drastically change their approach there is zero way they can salvage a game built around attacker's advantage and "one mistake costs the game" units-, but the magnitude of the aggravation remains unknown.
On June 03 2015 22:11 TokO wrote: I think people have missed the fact that there is a dynamic between
That's not the problem. The problem is that most people aren't able to understand the concept of asymmetrical races.
And incompleteness. I'm fed up with people saying mech needs this or that. Styles should have weaknesses that you have to get around (be it lack of mobility, lack of map control, air vulnerability, susceptibility to AOE damage...). Mech/air in LotV is going to be so boring and broken (everything is done to make it perfectly all around) everyone will cry for bio after a month.
Liberator is only OP for now, after the bug fix they'd be total trash. Who needs a unit that
1. takes forever to siege up 2. takes an eternity to unsiege 3. only can shoot at a small limited area 4. high single target damage but no AOE 5. needs 200/200 research before you can even get that AG 6. most important of all, can't even shoot at buildings lol
On June 04 2015 23:09 HallofPain4444 wrote: Liberator is only OP for now, after the bug fix they'd be total trash. Who needs a unit that
1. takes forever to siege up 2. takes an eternity to unsiege 3. only can shoot at a small limited area 4. high single target damage but no AOE 5. needs 200/200 research before you can even get that AG 6. most important of all, can't even shoot at buildings lol
Yes, they should probably declare the bug a feature and balance the unit by tweaking other stats. The way it is working right now is rather interesting. Blizzard, what's your take on this? TALK TO US.
On June 04 2015 19:23 HallofPain4444 wrote: I think DK removed AA for earlly game cyclone because he wants Banshee opening to be viable. Banshee would be the worst unit in the game by far if its only use as TvT opener is taken away.
I think that Cyclones can be polished a lot while retaining AA early game (very limited). One problem was that tagging air units early game was insanely broken as it cut most of the counters Cyclones could have... What about making AA worse or simply, not allowing Cyclones to "tag" air units until upgrade? I mean, able to attack air units within 5 range but not able to track them. Marines are also 5 range. That would mean micro battles in early PvT/TvP and easy to open mech with some AA but with very limited range. Not a bad option. Gives space to rework a bit VoidRays / Oracles and gives mech a limited AA option. Also cyclone damage could be tuned down a bit to be X+bonus vs armor to balance it.
There is also very good way of making banshees good in TvP, and it's very simple: remove light tag. Phoenixes move faster than banshees anyways and can move and shoot at the same time, so it's a realtively easy kill (like Vikings vs Banshee in TvT). Queens and banes have no attribute just for this same reason, making them harder to counter since they take no bonus damage from any source (Except Queens from Ghost snipe). Zerg has no unit that deals bonus damage vs light air and Terran only has Thors with bonus damage vs light, but It's rare to see mass Banshee in TvT since Vikings and now Liberators can just trash them.
Balance team seems to be short on thinking.
Could we officialy suggest and test ideas like this?
On June 04 2015 21:10 dust7 wrote: How long could it possibly take them to fix the liberator bug? How are they expecting us to test a unit when it is working completely different than intended? How could they release the unit when the bug is even visible in the unit's official introduction video?
Another indicator that Blizzard is pushing LotV out with minimal resources and quality control and will then move on to games that make money.
Remember the Phoenix lift bug? wasn't even Beta and it took them forever to fix.
Yeah only if DK would listen. He wants to make T Mech and T air viable composition on its own, but even a fool can tell it ain't happening.
Mech : Cyclone/Hellion(Hellbat) is an ok composition in TvP and TvZ. Tanks are still somewhat underpowered, Thors are abusolute trash, WM does not have very good synergy with pure mech comp.
Air : Most the air units are just pure trash on their own. Liberator has its role as anti-Muta and that's about it. Banshees are not good enough as harrass unit other than TvT and pure dead weight in late game.(OMFG I still can't believe this thing is actually 3 food) Vikings and BCs are pure dead weight. Raven spells are worthless like fuck.(can we please trade the Raven for Viper LOL)
On June 05 2015 00:35 HallofPain4444 wrote: Yeah only if DK would listen. He wants to make T Mech and T air viable composition on its own, but even a fool can tell it ain't happening.
Mech : Cyclone/Hellion(Hellbat) is an ok composition in TvP and TvZ. Tanks are still somewhat underpowered, Thors are abusolute trash, WM does not have very good synergy with pure mech comp.
Air : Most the air units are just pure trash on their own. Liberator has its role as anti-Muta and that's about it. Banshees are not good enough as harrass unit other than TvT and pure dead weight in late game.(OMFG I still can't believe this thing is actually 3 food) Vikings and BCs are pure dead weight. Raven spells are worthless like fuck.(can we please trade the Raven for Viper LOL)
When did he say he wants Air and Ground to be two different compositions? You are just spitting nonsense
With the updates to the Starport units as well as the Liberator add, we felt the Starport is rounded enough to split into two different upgrades again. This will create more specific choices in unit composition and strategies in Terran matchups. Our hope here is that we see a good variety in the Barracks/Factory/Starport units be used in various matchups and situations.
That's what DK said. Obiviously he doesn't want u to mix up ground mech and air. Learn how to read before calling other ppl nonsense.
Does DK know that Terran air isn't a viable comp versus zerg? The Viper swarm ability shrecks air comps over 20 supply because the viper spell stacks with itself (compare it to storm which doesn't stack with itself). There aren't going to be terran air comps against zerg that exceed 10 flying units.
Heroes just launched, but I hope we get some sort of update on SC2 from Blizzard this week. This beta is going much too slowly. This is disregarding balance which they are wrongfully focusing on when they do work on SC2. I guess this is how they compensate for SoonTM since they said the beta would be a longer one.
Seems like everything is locked in for LotV in regards to design (sadly), but we need:
- matchmaking - arcade/chat revamp (not just a copy paste of Heroes')
I kinda think that the separation of the upgrades (and other changes, like the ultralisk one) might be a nudge-nudge towards just having a bio-centric composition, and molding other units around it, anything from banshees and thors to liberators and widow mines. I don't think mech the way we envision it (position-oriented) is going to work out except in a heavily turtling situation, which might be amplified by the lower-econ situation (to gather more resources for an optimal force, players might hang back even more so than before because of how mech and air units scale; or, conversely, they'll drop the concept altogether in favor of the more mobile bio if the bases and buildings and stars simply don't align).
On June 05 2015 02:10 CannonsNCarriers wrote: Does DK know that Terran air isn't a viable comp versus zerg? The Viper swarm ability shrecks air comps over 20 supply because the viper spell stacks with itself (compare it to storm which doesn't stack with itself). There aren't going to be terran air comps against zerg that exceed 10 flying units.
Time to use Ghosts. Have you seen recent TvP's?
With the Marauder Nerfed, small Zealot speed buff, and Adepts tanking, gateway+archons + some Immortal/air support is working well vs bio. No more deathballs, no more Colossi.
And guess what? Terran is using Ghosts. 3-6 at a time. Micro dances between EMPs, Snipes and HT's moving, splitting and FF.
Some Ghost buff and ready. EMPs/Snipes trash Vikings from 10 range.
On June 05 2015 02:57 Spect8rCraft wrote: I kinda think that the separation of the upgrades (and other changes, like the ultralisk one) might be a nudge-nudge towards just having a bio-centric composition, and molding other units around it, anything from banshees and thors to liberators and widow mines. I don't think mech the way we envision it (position-oriented) is going to work out except in a heavily turtling situation, which might be amplified by the lower-econ situation (to gather more resources for an optimal force, players might hang back even more so than before because of how mech and air units scale; or, conversely, they'll drop the concept altogether in favor of the more mobile bio if the bases and buildings and stars simply don't align).
Yep, you are probably right here. I on the other hand wish that "true mech" was viable in itself, but that it in some situations was slightly more ideal to mix in a few starport units or perhaps the Ghost without it being dead neccesities.
Unless your opponent goes full transition it's never a good idea to mix units when playing Mech imo. Maybe a few medivacs for tank drop but that's about it. If you play Mech and want to upgrade air, it takes the cost of 4 cyclones to get air 1/1. The truth is, you will be in a much superior position if you made 4 cyclones instead of air 1/1, no matter what happens after.
i have been trying to slip in air upgrades between mech upgrades. instead of going right for 2/2 mech after i get 1/1 i will go +1 air attack and +2 ground attack. then when ground mech is +3 attack and +2 armour i will do +2 air attack and +3 ground armour at the same time. helps out liberator and viking dps but makes your ground army a little more squishy.
On June 05 2015 02:10 CannonsNCarriers wrote: Does DK know that Terran air isn't a viable comp versus zerg? The Viper swarm ability shrecks air comps over 20 supply because the viper spell stacks with itself (compare it to storm which doesn't stack with itself). There aren't going to be terran air comps against zerg that exceed 10 flying units.
Time to use Ghosts. Have you seen recent TvP's?
With the Marauder Nerfed, small Zealot speed buff, and Adepts tanking, gateway+archons + some Immortal/air support is working well vs bio. No more deathballs, no more Colossi.
And guess what? Terran is using Ghosts. 3-6 at a time. Micro dances between EMPs, Snipes and HT's moving, splitting and FF.
Some Ghost buff and ready. EMPs/Snipes trash Vikings from 10 range.
I will believe that when I see good players making ghosts versus zerg. Right now, that transition does not pay off enough to make good players do it in competitive matches.
That said, if they did some kind of buff/change to make it viable I think it would be good for the game. Maybe adjust Emp so it was actually possible to accurately hit air units? (I never know if I am casting on their shadow or on them) Or just straight buff emp is terran counter casting is easier.
On June 05 2015 02:10 CannonsNCarriers wrote: Does DK know that Terran air isn't a viable comp versus zerg? The Viper swarm ability shrecks air comps over 20 supply because the viper spell stacks with itself (compare it to storm which doesn't stack with itself). There aren't going to be terran air comps against zerg that exceed 10 flying units.
Time to use Ghosts. Have you seen recent TvP's?
With the Marauder Nerfed, small Zealot speed buff, and Adepts tanking, gateway+archons + some Immortal/air support is working well vs bio. No more deathballs, no more Colossi.
And guess what? Terran is using Ghosts. 3-6 at a time. Micro dances between EMPs, Snipes and HT's moving, splitting and FF.
Some Ghost buff and ready. EMPs/Snipes trash Vikings from 10 range.
I will believe that when I see good players making ghosts versus zerg. Right now, that transition does not pay off enough to make good players do it in competitive matches.
That said, if they did some kind of buff/change to make it viable I think it would be good for the game. Maybe adjust Emp so it was actually possible to accurately hit air units? (I never know if I am casting on their shadow or on them) Or just straight buff emp is terran counter casting is easier.
Protoss has been using HTs since the very first day to counter enemy casters and blobs of units, fitting into almost every compo (Gateway, Gateway-Robo, Skytoss, Gateway-VoidRay...). Why can't Terrans do the same? Ghosts are also strong vs enemy casters with both of their abilities. I know Ghost is quite overpriced and far from ideal, needing to be refined... but it exists. Maybe with a cost decrease, specially on minerals (100/100) it could be way more viable.
I think that both Immortals and Ghosts have an overcost on minerals which is very unnecesary. You can make units more dispensable, a bit more "core", and tune them a bit down to promote trades.
On June 05 2015 02:10 CannonsNCarriers wrote: Does DK know that Terran air isn't a viable comp versus zerg? The Viper swarm ability shrecks air comps over 20 supply because the viper spell stacks with itself (compare it to storm which doesn't stack with itself). There aren't going to be terran air comps against zerg that exceed 10 flying units.
Time to use Ghosts. Have you seen recent TvP's?
With the Marauder Nerfed, small Zealot speed buff, and Adepts tanking, gateway+archons + some Immortal/air support is working well vs bio. No more deathballs, no more Colossi.
And guess what? Terran is using Ghosts. 3-6 at a time. Micro dances between EMPs, Snipes and HT's moving, splitting and FF.
Some Ghost buff and ready. EMPs/Snipes trash Vikings from 10 range.
I will believe that when I see good players making ghosts versus zerg. Right now, that transition does not pay off enough to make good players do it in competitive matches.
That said, if they did some kind of buff/change to make it viable I think it would be good for the game. Maybe adjust Emp so it was actually possible to accurately hit air units? (I never know if I am casting on their shadow or on them) Or just straight buff emp is terran counter casting is easier.
Then learn. It's very consistent. Protoss already has to deal with that with storm.
On June 07 2015 22:08 Hider wrote: Anyone enjoying using Liberators? I mean not in terms of "they are really strong" or "they allow me to use a different style", but rather in terms of them being fun to control?
It's hard to say anything about liberators as long as the targetting circles "bug" isn't clarified.
On June 07 2015 22:08 Hider wrote: Anyone enjoying using Liberators? I mean not in terms of "they are really strong" or "they allow me to use a different style", but rather in terms of them being fun to control?
It's hard to say anything about liberators as long as the targetting circles "bug" isn't clarified.
It's not a bug.
Liberator A make circle A to the left, liberator B make circle B to the right. Liberator A can shoot into circle A or B. Same for liberator B.
The only requirement is the range. The circles must be in the range of each liberator. Each liberator share the circles if they are able to shoot into.
On June 07 2015 22:08 Hider wrote: Anyone enjoying using Liberators? I mean not in terms of "they are really strong" or "they allow me to use a different style", but rather in terms of them being fun to control?
It's hard to say anything about liberators as long as the targetting circles "bug" isn't clarified.
It's not a bug.
Liberator A make circle A to the left, liberator B make circle B to the right. Liberator A can shoot into circle A or B. Same for liberator B.
The only requirement is the range. The circles must be in the range of each liberator. Each liberator share the circles if they are able to shoot into.
I thought they said it was a bug and not intended ? Now I'm confused.
On June 07 2015 22:08 Hider wrote: Anyone enjoying using Liberators? I mean not in terms of "they are really strong" or "they allow me to use a different style", but rather in terms of them being fun to control?
It's hard to say anything about liberators as long as the targetting circles "bug" isn't clarified.
It's not a bug.
Liberator A make circle A to the left, liberator B make circle B to the right. Liberator A can shoot into circle A or B. Same for liberator B.
The only requirement is the range. The circles must be in the range of each liberator. Each liberator share the circles if they are able to shoot into.
I thought they said it was a bug and not intended ? Now I'm confused.
Of course it is. What is up with the sad face, though? Does anyone really want this stupid mechanic where one unit "teleports" all the rest's missiles to a circle?
On June 08 2015 01:15 usethis2 wrote: Of course it is. What is up with the sad face, though? Does anyone really want this stupid mechanic where one unit "teleports" all the rest's missiles to a circle?
Maybe it's just to express disappointment at Blizzard incompetence, let's not overinterpret.
On June 10 2015 00:00 VisionFlare wrote: small question: does the corruptor now have both abilities, caustic spray AND corruption? or has caustic spray been removed?
thx for the answer
Never seen the Corruptor since, but I'm pretty sure it just means that when you right click a building, it now casts Caustic Spray on it. Instead of having to use the spell manually.
Does anyone else feel the patches come at too low a pace right now ? In LotV current state, weekly patches or at least discussions would be welcome. Maybe Heroes launch needed them to use the whole team so that not much progress was made on LotV, but I hope to see a big acceleration in changes (and in a positive way) in those holidays.
On June 12 2015 04:04 [PkF] Wire wrote: Does anyone else feel the patches come at too low a pace right now ? In LotV current state, weekly patches or at least discussions would be welcome. Maybe Heroes launch needed them to use the whole team so that not much progress was made on LotV, but I hope to see a big acceleration in changes (and in a positive way) in those holidays.
yeah the lack of updates of any kind regarding LotV is really bad. Nathanias made a post on reddit too:
"I"d just like to state there have been a MASSIVE number of great suggestions for testing out small unit tweaks etc as well as many demands for ladder by progamers over the last month or so. I strongly feel blizzard's slowness with patching or reluctance to respond on many issues is greatly hurting the beta and I"m upset we don't see more frequent patching or written updates like the ones we got from david kim at the start."
I feel like their "extrem long Beta" is just an excuse to cover up that it actually is an ordinary Beta due to the fact that they use just a fourth of staff and effort as they used for the HotS Beta back then.
On June 12 2015 04:04 [PkF] Wire wrote: Does anyone else feel the patches come at too low a pace right now ? In LotV current state, weekly patches or at least discussions would be welcome. Maybe Heroes launch needed them to use the whole team so that not much progress was made on LotV, but I hope to see a big acceleration in changes (and in a positive way) in those holidays.
There's no rush. Just go play a few games of Heroes in the mean time, it's pretty fun. ^_^
On June 12 2015 04:04 [PkF] Wire wrote: Does anyone else feel the patches come at too low a pace right now ? In LotV current state, weekly patches or at least discussions would be welcome. Maybe Heroes launch needed them to use the whole team so that not much progress was made on LotV, but I hope to see a big acceleration in changes (and in a positive way) in those holidays.
There's no rush. Just go play a few games of Heroes in the mean time, it's pretty fun. ^_^
He he . I don't need things to keep me occupied, I've still got a ton of bonus pool to spend so I'm happy to be playing HotS right now. I'll probably try Heroes at some point but the fact that LotV Beta improvement is going so slow makes me worried, since the initial product is, to put it nicely, imperfect.
On June 12 2015 04:04 [PkF] Wire wrote: Does anyone else feel the patches come at too low a pace right now ? In LotV current state, weekly patches or at least discussions would be welcome. Maybe Heroes launch needed them to use the whole team so that not much progress was made on LotV, but I hope to see a big acceleration in changes (and in a positive way) in those holidays.
There's no rush. Just go play a few games of Heroes in the mean time, it's pretty fun. ^_^
He he . I don't need things to keep me occupied, I've still got a ton of bonus pool to spend so I'm happy to be playing HotS right now. I'll probably try Heroes at some point but the fact that LotV Beta improvement is going so slow makes me worried, since the initial product is, to put it nicely, imperfect.
Starcraft II is already imperfect, the expansion will just add to this legacy while improving on many particulars. I've fallen into this trap myself in the past, but it's rather foolish to expect more of Blizzard than they're capable of delivering. Hope springs eternal, but it's wiser to extrapolate from their track record and engage LotV with an attitude of carefree cynicism.
On June 12 2015 04:04 [PkF] Wire wrote: Does anyone else feel the patches come at too low a pace right now ? In LotV current state, weekly patches or at least discussions would be welcome. Maybe Heroes launch needed them to use the whole team so that not much progress was made on LotV, but I hope to see a big acceleration in changes (and in a positive way) in those holidays.
There's no rush. Just go play a few games of Heroes in the mean time, it's pretty fun. ^_^
it's not about a "rush," it's more that people are getting bored of the raw, broken version of lotv. i switched back to hots after a few weeks of legacy because it's just more fun. legacy doesn't feel like i'm testing anything or experiencing a fun new game, it just feels like "hey, play this unfinished thing for a while, love blizzard"
i'm not complaining, because it's a beta so whatever, but if their goal is to have a healthy, bustling scene for an extended beta, i dunno if they're going about it the right way
On June 12 2015 04:04 [PkF] Wire wrote: Does anyone else feel the patches come at too low a pace right now ? In LotV current state, weekly patches or at least discussions would be welcome. Maybe Heroes launch needed them to use the whole team so that not much progress was made on LotV, but I hope to see a big acceleration in changes (and in a positive way) in those holidays.
I don't really mind that patches are coming out slowly tbh, I would just love some sort of update at least weekly. Maybe a few paragraphs about what the devs have been looking at, brief thoughts for future changes etc. We're kinda in the dark right now.
On June 12 2015 08:11 brickrd wrote: it's not about a "rush," it's more that people are getting bored of the raw, broken version of lotv. i switched back to hots after a few weeks of legacy because it's just more fun. legacy doesn't feel like i'm testing anything or experiencing a fun new game, it just feels like "hey, play this unfinished thing for a while, love blizzard"
i'm not complaining, because it's a beta so whatever, but if their goal is to have a healthy, bustling scene for an extended beta, i dunno if they're going about it the right way
On June 12 2015 16:38 Salteador Neo wrote: I feel there's a whole lack of interest for this beta tbh. Many more people provided ideas in threads than streams/players.
Blizz really need to step up if they want SC2 to stay relevant in the near future.
Yea, I feel the same way. I just hope Blizzard does not waste this last opportunity. Right now: HotS > LotV
We need the vehicles and ship weapons seperation to be reverted otherwise i do not see much strategic diversity coming to LOTV to be honest.
The reason they were combined in the first place was because it's too expensive to get air and ground armor/attack upgrades. It simply is not feasible, especially versus protoss.
I hope people urge blizzard to revert that immediately.
On June 13 2015 00:58 Sogetsu wrote: At least the Armor combined for Vehicule and Ship Mech... like they did a long time ago. That fasion is not THAT bad...
Even if it sounds stupid, I think the most utile option for Terran would be to combine Mech Weapons and split Mech armor.
On June 13 2015 00:58 Sogetsu wrote: At least the Armor combined for Vehicule and Ship Mech... like they did a long time ago. That fasion is not THAT bad...
Even if it sounds stupid, I think the most utile option for Terran would be to combine Mech Weapons and split Mech armor.
Got a beta today and played just 3 matches, one for each race.
Some quick thoughts (first feelings - best feelings):
Terran - Didn't understood the Cyclone. Kinda strange gameplay. - Liberator is too strong AG while is too weak AA, very likely to be nerfed/buffed - So many upgrades! They added about 3 new upgrades and splitted armory upgrades. And it's all after the reduce of resources on the map...
Zerg - Ravagers are so weak. And their ability is too hard to hit a target, so it's like only effective vs static defences. - Lurkers are good!
Protoss - Don't understand Adept at all. It's like a new Reaper. - Disruptor is good!
Overall - Don't like the reduce of resources at all! We need more resources, not less! - Like the 12 starting workers and increased limit given by Nexus/CC/Hatcheries, just feels better
On June 13 2015 00:58 Sogetsu wrote: At least the Armor combined for Vehicule and Ship Mech... like they did a long time ago. That fasion is not THAT bad...
Even if it sounds stupid, I think the most utile option for Terran would be to combine Mech Weapons and split Mech armor.
No, that actually makes a lot of sense
Gameplay-wise, it might. Sure it would be nice since solves a big problem of mech and transitioning: having enough firepower. Mech scales very well with damage upgrades, while armor ones are usually less relevant.
However design wise, it seems weird to me. Specially because we could be falling under the same problematic of Mech in HotS TvZ, which is units not being able to scale fast enough to match Mech power. There should be adjustements probably regarding Spire cost and some upgrades in ZvT, but also would demand close attention to PvT, as the matchup is subject to massive transformation with the new changes.
Zerg midgame in LotV is subject to a ton of balance though, since Ravagers haven't found their place, there is discussion around Roach upgrading and Hydras need an urgent rework IMAO that gives them more meat/speed (20-30HP, 1 armor). Specially 1 point of armor would help Hydras a ton vs splash damage and units that commonly shredd them, helping it against improved siege tanks.
I think splitting Mech Armor only could be worth a try. Also making banshees non light like banelings. Only 2 units benefit from Banshees being light, which are Thors and Phoenixes. Terran has liberators now vs air and Phoenix just counters Banshees by default by having more speed and moving shot.
On June 13 2015 01:59 Jenia6109 wrote: Got a beta today and played just 3 matches, one for each race.
Some quick thoughts (first feelings - best feelings):
Terran - Didn't understood the Cyclone. Kinda strange gameplay. - Liberator is too strong AG while is too weak AA, very likely to be nerfed/buffed - So many upgrades! They added about 3 new upgrades and splitted armory upgrades. And it's all after the reduce of resources on the map...
Zerg - Ravagers are so weak. And their ability is too hard to hit a target, so it's like only effective vs static defences. - Lurkers are good!
Protoss - Don't understand Adept at all. It's like a new Reaper. - Disruptor is good!
Overall - Don't like the reduce of resources at all! We need more resources, not less! - Like the 12 starting workers and increased limit given by Nexus/CC/Hatcheries, just feels better
Play more with adepts. They form one of the core units of the toss army currently, they are nothing like a reaper, which has incidental use at best.
EPT![[image loading]](http://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/blog_header/ZIBRBIXE7F5K1426688146595.jpg)
we'll see ( i dont think it'll work ) 
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/2c4FhhP.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/GTcqtFl.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/xec8s86.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9zt58II.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/blog_header/ITTMTPX5F5C21364602617849.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Zvhab1W.png)
