We wanted to give you all an update on the specific changes we are planning for the next balance update. Little of this should come as a surprise for those of you who have to reading, giving feedback, and interacting with us on the weekly dev updates. Please remember that none of this is final, and we definitely want to hear your thoughts before and after you play with the changes once they go live to the beta." Addressed an issue with air unit separation when in larger numbers.
We made some changes to allow for smoother microing of larger numbers of air units.
Enabled Siege Tank/immortal turret tracking Per community suggestion, we have made a change to the way Siege Tank and Immortal turrets behave when firing and moving in quick succession. Added minimap icons for destructible rocks and towers
With the high rate at which maps rotate in and out of the ladder, we wanted to give some support in this area for Void. These were the two main things that were missing on the minimap, so we’ve added icons to indicate where the destructible units are on the map. Added possible enemy spawn location support at the start of games
Some maps have special rules on enemy spawn locations. We wanted the game to easily point this out, because we will most likely continue to have special case rules on new maps going forward. At the start of the game for 10 seconds, you will be able to see the possible enemy start locations on the minimap. Ghost new snipe ability - 170 damage after 3 seconds, but ability is cancelled if the ghost is hit. Targets bio only.
We’ve replaced the armor debuff drone ability with this version of Snipe, mainly due to your feedback regarding the fantasy of the Ghost lacking with the previous ability we tried. We wanted to capture the fantasy of Ghosts sneaking around or being positioned really well out of harms way in order to deal massive single target damage. This new ability works a bit differently from most abilities in that you can’t just run away to cancel the ability. Instead, you must interrupt the Ghost’s set up time by dealing damage to the Ghost. The reason we wanted to try this route was to have some interaction between both players instead of Snipe being an ability that only one player is involved in.
Disruptor Changes
Our main goal here was to reduce the maximum impact of the current Disruptor so that each shot is not so game ending, and also to increase the minimum impact per shot of Disruptors so that each shot is a bit more reliable. We also wanted to make Disruptors less of a suicide unit, and turn them into more of a unit where the Protoss player has to add up a bunch of smaller wins in order to be successful with them.
In order to do so, we’ve significantly lowered the radius that the Disruptors hit, increased its speed to make each shot a bit easier to hit at least some units, and increased its survivability. Please remember that the balance might not quite be there yet, but we mainly wanted to get a wider playtesting with this unit in order to better tune it throughout the beta. Raven changes + Raven upgrade changes The main goal here was to reduce the potential stalemate scenarios with Ravens in the future, and to have Ravens see a bit more play. With the much higher damage of auto turrets, they would be much stronger in a specific combat situation rather than being persistent forces on the map. And with the new Raven upgrade, our hope is to have more strategies where the one time usage of spells in specific situations could be stronger. At the same time, we hope to nerf the mass Raven case mostly through the auto turret duration change and the Seeker missile cost change.
Combined mech armor upgrades We felt the complete split in upgrade was too much of a nerf in terms of mech play, and wanted to go back a little bit. We chose to combine only the armor upgrades so that it helps full mech strategies out a bit more so than bio play supported by mech. We felt bio play supported by mech often times only get weapon upgrades on mech units, so by doing this, that type of play style will still need to research 2 different weapon upgrades if they want to utilize units from both the factory and starport. Ravager range increase from 4 to 6
This change is to help Ravagers stay behind Roaches better and focus on firing its ability. We felt Ravagers could use a bit more help, and this change popularly suggested by our community was a solid direction when we tested it out internally. Liberator changes
We wanted to make the anti-ground role of the Liberator a bit more core to the unit, so we reduced the requirement to mode switch to just an Armory requirement. We also wanted to try reducing the time required to switch back to mobile form in order to have Liberators run away a bit easier. This should help allow the anti-ground mode to be used a bit more aggressively around the map.
We also fixed a bug that was occurring with the Liberator that caused it to shoot further than its indicator whenever there were overlapping indicators. This unintentionally ended up nerfing the Liberator, so we increased the radius which is actually a buff in the overall case, and about the same effectiveness in the overlapping area.
These changes will be coming to the beta very soon. Thank you for continuing to help test various ideas and changes throughout the beta, and we’re looking forward to hearing what you have to say about these specific topics. Thank you." PATCH 2.5.3
Archon Mode
You can now use the Alt plus control group number or Alt, Shift, and control group number to ‘steal’ units from your allies’ control.
When the party leader joins the queue for Archon mode, all members of the party will be shown the selected race.
Chat
Made several changes to improve the in-game chat system.
Added a Chat Manager to help manage multiple channels.
Added channel members list.
You can now increase the chat window size.
General
Ranked ladder play is now available.
The following gameplay options are being removed from the menu and will permanently be active.
Display World Object Tooltips
Display Game Tooltips.
Display Hotkeys on Command Card.
Enable Starting Worker Rally.
Game Timer.
New Tab: Observer and Replay Options.
'Show Build Grid’ is now on by default.
'Voice’ tab renamed to ‘Voice Chat.’
Bug Fixes
Fixed an issue where a Cyclone’s Lock On ability would be stuck in the ‘On’ state.
Researching Targeting Optics should no longer prevent the Cyclone from using the Lock On ability on flying units.
The number of current Heroes of the Storm games will no longer appear in chat.
Fixed an issue where Reaper’s KD8 charge would reverse Adept’s Psionic Transfer ability.
The Reaper’s KD8 charge will no longer break the automatic harvest cycle of workers.
The Reaper’s KD8 charge should no longer interfere with a unit’s ability to use shift-queued commands.
Graviton Beam will no longer instantly cause a Ravager or Lurker to finish morphing.
Terran A.I. should once again research Vehicle Weapon upgrades.
(2) Dash and Terminal – All gold bases should now have the correct number of full mineral patches.
(2) Bridgehead LE – All bases should have 5 full mineral patches.
Build Bypass Armor Drone and Research Rapid Deployment now have hotkeys.
Bypass Armor Drone will now reacquire a target that has left and reentered its range.
Cyclone now receives the correct amount of armor from armor upgrades.
Fixed an issue that caused the Bypass Armor Drone to not display it’s visual on a Stalker that used blink.
The Immortal’s Barrier should now properly block the Disruptor’s Purification Nova.
Fixed an issue that prevented a party leader from inviting a player who recently left their party.
Motherships should no longer be able to cast Photon Overcharge on Pylons.
[MAC] Fixed a crash when attempting to download the latest patch.
Positives I really like. Toying with ravens and increasing auto turret damage. Working with what the ghost has already in its arsenal.
Regarding the ghost, I'd like to see how nukes work there way back into the game too.
On July 14 2015 03:11 HmmmCookies wrote: Still no economy change? Come on Blizz get your...stuff...together!
Blizzard is most certainly aware that there are people unhappy with the current economy. It's kind of tiring to hear people complain about. No point in beating a dead horse. I'd rather here how you feel about the current changes and what impact it could have on the game.
A lot of good stuff in here, but the Protoss race overall still needs a ton of work and the sooner the better. They have to tackle it's lack of mobility and make Warpgates have some drawbacks compared to normal Gateways. If Warpgates aren't so overused anymore, gateway units can finally get some buffs.
On July 13 2015 02:31 Ball656 wrote: make transforming each gateway to warpgate cost the minerals and build time of a zealot. A warpgate is more useful than a gateway, so it makes sense that it would cost more. Since it gives you the units it produces almost a production cycle early, and with more flexibility with regard to location, it makes sense that this additional cost would match up with the cost of one unit. An 8 gate that has to spend 800 extra minerals transforming its gateways to warp gates would be much less powerful, but still a bit better than an 8 gate that declines to transform its gateways, spends the time waiting for its units to finish and then walks across the map (or arrives at the same time with 8 less units).
I actually really like this idea - thank you! Yes, in the late game you want warpgates and there is no reason not to have them. However, in early game, if you attach an extra cost of transforming each individual gateway to warpgate - then there is a really valid decission of what you need most. Maybe, instead of getting 4 warpgates, you want to put that expansion first?
I love this idea btw, it makes sense on so many levels. You could even put warpgate later in the tech tree and increase the cooldowns between warp-ins until it''s faster to build a big gateway army through normal gateways instead of warpgates. Then in the lategame you would like to have 10 Gateways for building your army and maybe 5 warpgates for harassing via Warpprisms/proxy Pylons or to defend harass.
Then finally buffs for gateway units like giving zealots 10 more shield and faster zealot legs and lots of other stuff would be possible.
And maybe try the senrtry restoring shields out in the MP?
All Protoss has right now seems to be the Adpet/Immortal all-in or die trying to get out Carriers somehow .
I don't like balance updates that do not contain all the numbers.
Ghost 170dmg, 3second channel for 25mana still or what???? If so, that's bonkers. Disruptor and Raven changes, which ones? Air separation what?
I like the Liberator solution, but I believe it should stick after you had an armory once. Otherwise its plenty weird when your Liberators lose the ability again (like OLs with the creep pooping) and you need to make another armory.
On July 14 2015 03:23 Big J wrote: I don't like balance updates that do not contain all the numbers.
Ghost 170dmg, 3second channel for 25mana still or what???? If so, that's bonkers. Disruptor and Raven changes, which ones? Air separation what?
I like the Liberator solution, but I believe it should stick after you had an armory once. Otherwise its plenty weird when your Liberators lose the ability again (like OLs with the creep pooping) and you need to make another armory.
Armory Sniping could be a legitimate strategy if they don't change it the way you mention. Could be interesting.
I really would like them to try out different versions of the disruptor, we are still in early beta afterall. What about instead of a single shot unit , they gained a persistent spinning attack which deals less damage than the nova , but it activates only when they reach a specific speed (3/4 ? ) , assuming they change its acceleration to take some time to reach maximum speed?
As a Masters Terran player I actually totally disagree with them combining mech and air upgrades again. Mech is too strong in TvT, period. There's no chance to win as a bio player if you don't do a lot of damage early.
Loving these changes, some excellent responses to community feedback. Interesting to see if they've got another stab at an economy test in the near future...
I lose more and more interest for every post I read from blizz that does not include anything related to economy changes but does include "new ability"..
On July 14 2015 04:25 blae000 wrote: I lose more and more interest for every post I read from blizz that does not include anything related to economy changes but does include "new ability"..
read 100 threads in this forum and you'll find 300 different versions of what people think the ideal economy is and they'll all be 100% certain their way is the best
what do you want them to do? pick one out of a hat? i think the new economy is fine. the significance of econ is overblown anyway. no matter how the economy works the meta will stabilize, the game will become less chaotic and what's important will be your skill at the game
seriously, i don't care how fast i have to expand, i just want good unit interaction
Wow, awesome changes across the board, sucks no more news on the economy or perhaps bolder changes to Protoss macro abilities (or just overall gateway army mobility) but one step at a time and we'll get there, they need to get the new units in line first before they do anything.
On July 14 2015 04:25 blae000 wrote: I lose more and more interest for every post I read from blizz that does not include anything related to economy changes but does include "new ability"..
Posts like this and other posts I read at the blizz forums with content such as: "toss still not fixed" "economy still not changed" "toss still not deleted" "terran still imba" "terran still M&M&M tier 1 bullshit" A. Isn't constructive. B. Adds to the toxic sphere right now in the community. C. Completely bypasses the fact that LOTV is still months away and might bring the change you want. D. Completely bypasses the fact that most of the people in this comment thread can't even play the beta yet and are either theory crafting or going by beta tournaments they saw on streams.
Sure; your allowed to debate. Sure; you are allowed to voice your opinion. But at least be constructive and mature about it instead of throwing such a childish tantrum that when you aren't getting change x you want so badly.
On July 14 2015 04:25 blae000 wrote: I lose more and more interest for every post I read from blizz that does not include anything related to economy changes but does include "new ability"..
read 100 threads in this forum and you'll find 300 different versions of what people think the ideal economy is and they'll all be 100% certain their way is the best
what do you want them to do? pick one out of a hat? i think the new economy is fine. the significance of econ is overblown anyway. no matter how the economy works the meta will stabilize, the game will become less chaotic and what's important will be your skill at the game
seriously, i don't care how fast i have to expand, i just want good unit interaction
The GEM one is pretty decent imo... They should pick that.
I'm not sure I like the direction the disruptor is taking... I would have wanted an increase in radius and lower damage and speed. To make it more of a position breaker and less of a core aoe damage dealer. Guess we'll have to try it out but I fear this version is not going to be a late game aoe option and P will basicaly need to fall back on virtually only storm in the late game.
On July 14 2015 04:25 blae000 wrote: I lose more and more interest for every post I read from blizz that does not include anything related to economy changes but does include "new ability"..
Posts like this and other posts I read at the blizz forums with content such as: "toss still not fixed" "economy still not changed" "toss still not deleted" "terran still imba" "terran still M&M&M tier 1 bullshit" A. Isn't constructive. B. Adds to the toxic sphere right now in the community. C. Completely bypasses the fact that LOTV is still months away and might bring the change you want. D. Completely bypasses the fact that most of the people in this comment thread can't even play the beta yet and are either theory crafting or going by beta tournaments they saw on streams.
Sure; your allowed to debate. Sure; you are allowed to voice your opinion. But at least be constructive and mature about it instead of throwing a tantrum that you aren't getting change x you want so badly.
I agree with this, half of the economy and Protoss design whiners are all the same exact people posting the exact same thing on multiple threads, I question sometimes if these people even play the beta or if they just sit there and theory craft.
By the way, for my constructive post on the matter
1. Zealot Legs at Twilight Council/Charge removed from game so Zealots can be fast and benefit from great control, Charge is stupid, A move, and to make Charge NOT stupid requires weird design changes, just be done with it, it sucks.
2. Adept shield upgrade changed to + dmg vs. armored or chain damage they are tanky enough they just get outclassed the further the game goes they need a little "bump" in the mid to late game.
3. Stalkers are awesome, don't touch them, anyone that says otherwise hasn't faced blink/sentry.
On July 14 2015 04:25 blae000 wrote: I lose more and more interest for every post I read from blizz that does not include anything related to economy changes but does include "new ability"..
Posts like this and other posts I read at the blizz forums with content such as: "toss still not fixed" "economy still not changed" "toss still not deleted" "terran still imba" "terran still M&M&M tier 1 bullshit" A. Isn't constructive. B. Adds to the toxic sphere right now in the community. C. Completely bypasses the fact that LOTV is still months away and might bring the change you want. D. Completely bypasses the fact that most of the people in this comment thread can't even play the beta yet and are either theory crafting or going by beta tournaments they saw on streams.
Sure; your allowed to debate. Sure; you are allowed to voice your opinion. But at least be constructive and mature about it instead of throwing a tantrum that you aren't getting change x you want so badly.
I agree with this, half of the economy and Protoss design whiners are all the same exact people posting the exact same thing on multiple threads, I question sometimes if these people even play the beta or if they just sit there and theory craft.
By the way, for my constructive post on the matter
1. Zealot Legs at Twilight Council/Charge removed from game so Zealots can be fast and benefit from great control, Charge is stupid, A move, and to make Charge NOT stupid requires weird design changes, just be done with it, it sucks.
2. Adept shield upgrade changed to + dmg vs. armored or chain damage they are tanky enough they just get outclassed the further the game goes they need a little "bump" in the mid to late game.
3. Stalkers are awesome, don't touch them, anyone that says otherwise hasn't faced blink/sentry.
Why don't people get this... YOU CANNOT REMOVE CHARGE AND KEEP CONCUSSIVE SHELLS. I'm all for faster Zealots that can be microed etc. but concussive shells flat out kill any micro potential.
I think that building Ghosts in TvT was pretty uncommon, but it might open up some interesting avenues for new army comps, although I don't genuinely see them being practical against the bio army when you can just build units to kill bio instead. That said, I'd have to play some Legacy before any more theorycrafting.
But this definitely looks like a better solution to Ultras than the armour reduction.
On July 14 2015 04:44 OtherWorld wrote: Why are the minimap changes for LotV only and not for HotS?
they probably don't want to spend dev time on hots that could be spent on lotv instead, and also making things lotv exclusive adds incentive for people to buy lotv i guess
Is it just me or are the hotkey settings still based on HotS beta? Like I'm trying to configure my Protoss hotkeys but the Stargate only shows the Phoenix, VR and Carrier, no Disruptor in the Robo Facility, etc. Also I checked the Factory and the Warhound is still in there.
Is there any way I can get to the other units, specifically MSC and Adept, so I can change them too?
On July 14 2015 03:11 HmmmCookies wrote: Still no economy change? Come on Blizz get your...stuff...together!
Blizzard is most certainly aware that there are people unhappy with the current economy. It's kind of tiring to hear people complain about. No point in beating a dead horse. I'd rather here how you feel about the current changes and what impact it could have on the game.
The point is the game will be garbage until they fix this, who cares about the unit changes until then?
Shouldn't there be a system whereby contributions from community members are acknowledged and they get the game at a reduced price? In reality Blizzard are crowd sourcing game testers!!!
Adept shield upgrade changed to + dmg vs. armored or chain damage they are tanky enough they just get outclassed the further the game goes they need a little "bump" in the mid to late game.
Bonus against light and armored? Do you really want to kill the terran bio style against protoss? Agree with you that in mid game it's more difficult to play Adept but terran have the same issue with reaper...
On July 14 2015 05:02 IntoTheheart wrote: I think that building Ghosts in TvT was pretty uncommon, but it might open up some interesting avenues for new army comps, although I don't genuinely see them being practical against the bio army when you can just build units to kill bio instead. That said, I'd have to play some Legacy before any more theorycrafting.
But this definitely looks like a better solution to Ultras than the armour reduction.
definetly better than the drone but still 3 secs (better that the original 5 xD) looks too long, i guess it will depend on the snipes range.
On July 14 2015 03:26 pieroog wrote: I like those changes a lot (especially to Disruptor) but..... isn't 170dmg with a Ghost's Snipe too much?
170 seems alrght:
Kills any Terran bio unit (Marine, Marauder, Ghost, Reaper, SCV, Hellbat) and any Protoss bio unit (Zealot, HT, DT, Adept) in one shot. Assuming it has a balanced energy cost or the 3 second thing ends up being a big deal, the only real targets for those two races are the spellcasters and DT's. And 3 seconds means they can cast some spells or have a chance to interrupt the damage.
So really it's a TvZ-focused spell, and would especially be useful for the new ultras (3 snipes = ded ultra). Could also deal with Lurkers or Brood Lords, not killing them outright but getting them close enough so that either a second snipe or a few auxiliary forces can deal with them easily. Think 2012 fungal vs. lings, baneling vs drones or BW storm vs lurker/muta. So I like this direction.
On July 14 2015 05:02 IntoTheheart wrote: I think that building Ghosts in TvT was pretty uncommon, but it might open up some interesting avenues for new army comps, although I don't genuinely see them being practical against the bio army when you can just build units to kill bio instead. That said, I'd have to play some Legacy before any more theorycrafting.
But this definitely looks like a better solution to Ultras than the armour reduction.
definetly betther than the drone but still 3 secs (better that the original 5 xD) looks too long, i guess it will depend on the snipes range.
i wonder how the new ghost vs ht dance will be
It should be a lot more interesting. HT gets all the storms off that he can before dying, or going in to feed/storm the ghost while the bio ball tries to prevent him, etc.
On July 14 2015 05:18 PickyProtoss wrote: Shouldn't there be a system whereby contributions from community members are acknowledged and they get the game at a reduced price? In reality Blizzard are crowd sourcing game testers!!!
Haha don't kid yourself, Blizzard is still doing whatever the hell they want, they're just hand picking the community suggestions that go their way and communicating a lot better on the changes they are making. Your proposal would just reward posters that were lucky to have the same idea david kim had
On July 14 2015 04:25 blae000 wrote: I lose more and more interest for every post I read from blizz that does not include anything related to economy changes but does include "new ability"..
Posts like this and other posts I read at the blizz forums with content such as: "toss still not fixed" "economy still not changed" "toss still not deleted" "terran still imba" "terran still M&M&M tier 1 bullshit" A. Isn't constructive. B. Adds to the toxic sphere right now in the community. C. Completely bypasses the fact that LOTV is still months away and might bring the change you want. D. Completely bypasses the fact that most of the people in this comment thread can't even play the beta yet and are either theory crafting or going by beta tournaments they saw on streams.
Sure; your allowed to debate. Sure; you are allowed to voice your opinion. But at least be constructive and mature about it instead of throwing a tantrum that you aren't getting change x you want so badly.
I agree with this, half of the economy and Protoss design whiners are all the same exact people posting the exact same thing on multiple threads, I question sometimes if these people even play the beta or if they just sit there and theory craft.
By the way, for my constructive post on the matter
1. Zealot Legs at Twilight Council/Charge removed from game so Zealots can be fast and benefit from great control, Charge is stupid, A move, and to make Charge NOT stupid requires weird design changes, just be done with it, it sucks.
2. Adept shield upgrade changed to + dmg vs. armored or chain damage they are tanky enough they just get outclassed the further the game goes they need a little "bump" in the mid to late game.
3. Stalkers are awesome, don't touch them, anyone that says otherwise hasn't faced blink/sentry.
Why don't people get this... YOU CANNOT REMOVE CHARGE AND KEEP CONCUSSIVE SHELLS. I'm all for faster Zealots that can be microed etc. but concussive shells flat out kill any micro potential.
I feel like Concussive Shells is a bandaid gone wrong anyway. In the early game it helps you survive, especially against gateway all-ins, because it allows you to micro more easily even against units that are faster than your own (pre stim and medivacs), while later on it just removes micro potential for the opponents (while yours is in tact through stim and medivacs) and often allows you to kill units for free.
On July 14 2015 05:18 PickyProtoss wrote: Shouldn't there be a system whereby contributions from community members are acknowledged and they get the game at a reduced price? In reality Blizzard are crowd sourcing game testers!!!
lol get real
it's not like this is even unique to blizzard, this is the direction games are going. why do you think everything is early access on steam?
if you think it's unfair then don't play and everyone who wants to play can keep playing without you. simple
Generally I like the way this is going, most times there is an update it actually seems like the community is being listened to.
Blizzard has to stop talking about merging upgrade being a buff or a nerf, its not its just situational bullshit that makes strategies one dimenional. If merging upgrades is required to make mech viable that means that mech has to be air transition. Meanin all mech games will look exactly the same. Buff mech, not a certain specific transition. Because merging upgrades does NOT directly buff mech. How is a mech player only building thors, helions and tanks buffed by that? He isn't and therefore that style is unviable. Why, because blizz refuses to actually buff mech.
And I'm a zerg player and thinks mech is insanely frustrating as it is btw.
On July 14 2015 05:33 Shuffleblade wrote: Generally I like the way this is going, most times there is an update it actually seems like the community is being listened to.
Blizzard has to stop talking about merging upgrade being a buff or a nerf, its not its just situational bullshit that makes strategies one dimenional. If merging upgrades is required to make mech viable that means that mech has to be air transition. Meanin all mech games will look exactly the same. Buff mech, not a certain specific transition. Because merging upgrades does NOT directly buff mech. How is a mech player only building thors, helions and tanks buffed by that? He isn't and therefore that style is unviable. Why, because blizz refuses to actually buff mech.
And I'm a zerg player and thinks mech is insanely frustrating as it is btw.
I think this time it is not to buff mech though, but to make the air units more viable. Mech with the addition of Cyclones probably has all the tools to go very heavily factorybased all game long against Protoss and Zerg. But they think that air units are not going to be played if you need to upgrade them extra from scratch.
On July 14 2015 05:33 Shuffleblade wrote: Generally I like the way this is going, most times there is an update it actually seems like the community is being listened to.
Blizzard has to stop talking about merging upgrade being a buff or a nerf, its not its just situational bullshit that makes strategies one dimenional. If merging upgrades is required to make mech viable that means that mech has to be air transition. Meanin all mech games will look exactly the same. Buff mech, not a certain specific transition. Because merging upgrades does NOT directly buff mech. How is a mech player only building thors, helions and tanks buffed by that? He isn't and therefore that style is unviable. Why, because blizz refuses to actually buff mech.
And I'm a zerg player and thinks mech is insanely frustrating as it is btw.
I think this time it is not to buff mech though, but to make the air units more viable. Mech with the addition of Cyclones probably has all the tools to go very heavily factorybased all game long against Protoss and Zerg. But they think that air units are not going to be played if you need to upgrade them extra from scratch.
If you have insider information please share it because the reasoning they have been giving in every single update has been that they are considering doing it to buff mech, in this very post they post this: "We felt the complete split in upgrade was too much of a nerf in terms of mech play, and wanted to go back a little bit. We chose to combine only the armor upgrades so that it helps full mech strategies out a bit more so than bio play supported by mech"
They felt the split was a "nerf" to mech, so they undo half the nerf to mech, effectively "buffing" it. If you have any other quote where they mention buffing air with this feel free to share it. (would be just as foolish though, if the air is weak buff the air not a transition so it might be used even though its weak.)
On July 14 2015 05:33 Shuffleblade wrote: Generally I like the way this is going, most times there is an update it actually seems like the community is being listened to.
Blizzard has to stop talking about merging upgrade being a buff or a nerf, its not its just situational bullshit that makes strategies one dimenional. If merging upgrades is required to make mech viable that means that mech has to be air transition. Meanin all mech games will look exactly the same. Buff mech, not a certain specific transition. Because merging upgrades does NOT directly buff mech. How is a mech player only building thors, helions and tanks buffed by that? He isn't and therefore that style is unviable. Why, because blizz refuses to actually buff mech.
And I'm a zerg player and thinks mech is insanely frustrating as it is btw.
I think this time it is not to buff mech though, but to make the air units more viable. Mech with the addition of Cyclones probably has all the tools to go very heavily factorybased all game long against Protoss and Zerg. But they think that air units are not going to be played if you need to upgrade them extra from scratch.
If you have insider information please share it because the reasoning they have been giving in every single update has been that they are considering doing it to buff mech, in this very post they post this: "We felt the complete split in upgrade was too much of a nerf in terms of mech play, and wanted to go back a little bit. We chose to combine only the armor upgrades so that it helps full mech strategies out a bit more so than bio play supported by mech"
They felt the split was a "nerf" to mech, so they undo half the nerf to mech, effectively "buffing" it. If you have any other quote where they mention buffing air with this feel free to share it. (would be just as foolish though, if the air is weak buff the air not a transition so it might be used even though its weak.)
Well, they consider the factory+starport style mech, so their quote is not contradicting to what I said. Air= part of Mech for them.
I don't have "insider information", but I believe the reasoning I gave is why they are doing it. I specifically believe that their detailed reasoning (something they rarely give for PR reasons) would contain the units banshee and viking as part of the traditional SC2-Mech army. This is also consistent with the second part of the sentence that it should be a buff to mech - in the sense mech+air units - but less so to bio+mech units which traditionally only gets the vehicle attack upgrade which they even wrote in the third sentence which you didn't quote:
We felt bio play supported by mech often times only get weapon upgrades on mech units, so by doing this, that type of play style will still need to research 2 different weapon upgrades if they want to utilize units from both the factory and starport.
So yes, the idea is that Mech can utilize Factory+Starport easier than Bio+Mech. While without the change Starport units would probably be left out of either style.
Added possible enemy spawn location support at the start of games
Some maps have special rules on enemy spawn locations. We wanted the game to easily point this out, because we will most likely continue to have special case rules on new maps going forward. At the start of the game for 10 seconds, you will be able to see the possible enemy start locations on the minimap.
does this mean on 4 play maps there going to know where i spawn or just where i can spawn. i guess its just me and im reading it wrong but i hope its not the first, and where i could spawn because player dont know the spawning locations.
also this is sounding pretty nice still going to be skeptical and keep my hopes down for a good game and hope to be pleasantly surprised rather than get super hyped. And I hope i can play cause the last few times have been soooooooooooo laggy its unplayable.
I would like to throw out a change to the Disruptor, curious what you all think? I do not like the idea of Disruptors being invincible while activated, but losing a expensive supply eater instantly is not fun.. I also think this makes them a balancing nightmare. How do you find the right area of effect and damage vs cost/supply without being so detrimental if they just die? Will increasing the speed and lowering the AOE work?? I'm curious but very skeptical...
What if when activated their speed increases as usual, BUT they are Not invincible(maybe shield increase when activated?) and when they are killed they split into 2 smaller disruptors with less hp/shield and deal less damage. If killed while activated the 2 smaller ones would still be active and deal their damage as well as continue on their last command?.
Not only would this be pretty cool, well I think so anyway, but would increase the micro potential of both players(im sure David Kim would love) as well as give some sort of insurance for the protoss player that spent a bunch of resources and army supply. I also think this will be good for both pros and new players because right now it seems difficult for beginners but pros can out micro it. Speeding it up while being invincible so pros cant out micro it just seems harmful to the game..
If its a shit idea I'll own up to it, but it seems worth some experimenting
Very vague, and their being adamant the liberator anti-ground is something interesting and needed kinda puzzles me.
Overall, I can kinda get behind the changes... But LotV still lacks elegance and simplicity in an overwhelming way and I fear that's something that's not going to change.
On July 14 2015 04:14 riotjune wrote: Now unsieged tanks can kite more effectively like their BW counterparts? Nice!
Lalush was a big proponent for that change.
i thought the damagepoint of 0.167s still make the Tank very difficult to micro for kiting purposes? so there is a guaranteed delay of 0.167s between the decision to fire and the actual damage.
Very vague, and their being adamant the liberator anti-ground is something interesting and needed kinda puzzles me.
It's needed in some form, if not on the tank, then on the Liberator.
It's actually the counter to Ultrasiks right now for Terran bio, since you have a Starport with reactor anyway, you can easily get a few of them out and their AG mode absolutely destroys Ultras. 2 armor more or less doesn't make a difference to them, they do insane single target damage.
It's actually the counter to Ultrasiks right now for Terran bio, since you have a Starport with reactor anyway, you can easily get a few of them out and their AG mode absolutely destroys Ultras. 2 armor more or less doesn't make a difference to them, they do insane single target damage.
Yeah, that's the intention. And there are enough mechanical differences between the Liberator and a hypothetical buffed tank to make it interesting: * Target ground, a mechanic we haven't seen before * Flying + long range means that it can abuse terrain better (ala BW carriers). * Single target gives it a clear weakness vs swarming units * Overkill, gives it counterplay via baiting out shots.
The Liberator is a well designed unit. What people actually bitch about is that the tank doesn't do what it does. Which is understandable, because Blizzard has a weird aversion to making the tank what people want it to be, but ultimately not all that important.
It's actually the counter to Ultrasiks right now for Terran bio, since you have a Starport with reactor anyway, you can easily get a few of them out and their AG mode absolutely destroys Ultras. 2 armor more or less doesn't make a difference to them, they do insane single target damage.
Yeah, that's the intention. And there are enough mechanical differences between the Liberator and a hypothetical buffed tank to make it interesting: * Target ground, a mechanic we haven't seen before * Flying + long range means that it can abuse terrain better (ala BW carriers). * Single target gives it a clear weakness vs swarming units * Overkill, gives it counterplay via baiting out shots.
The Liberator is a well designed unit. What people actually bitch about is that the tank doesn't do what it does. Which is understandable, because Blizzard has a weird aversion to making the tank what people want it to be, but ultimately not all that important.
Yeah they should make the tank stronger and maybe dumb it's targeting AI down a bit and focus the Cyclone on antiair, so we have something like the tank/goliath combo going again. The Cyclone being strong vs ground is just stupid as the tank and hellbats are supposed to fill that role. The poblem is that the Thor is then in an extremely weird place I guess.
On July 14 2015 03:11 HmmmCookies wrote: Still no economy change? Come on Blizz get your...stuff...together!
Blizzard is most certainly aware that there are people unhappy with the current economy. It's kind of tiring to hear people complain about. No point in beating a dead horse. I'd rather here how you feel about the current changes and what impact it could have on the game.
Except the only way to get Blizzard to address major problems (LIKE COMMUNITY INTERACTION) is to whine about it incessantly.
If the new ghost snipe replaces the old theyre going to make changes immediately. I dont like the idea of interrupt able skills in the game. It literally only effects one unit and both terran caster units will now have a wind up in order to use their more powerful skills. Theres only a feww ways this is going to get implemented with a channel.
Its either longer ranged and it will have an indicator because you don't want people losing units to an enemy they cant see to counter, or itll be medium ranged and itll be way too easy to reach it to knock it out of its channel. The amount of fast and long ranged units is ridiculous at this point, and if its about player interaction then can we make it so Feedback only does half damage? Because seriously the fact that the unit actively counters any unit with energy AND spell casters and its recycle ability lets it create a core unit is kind of ridiculous if we're talking about balancing both of terrans mostly useless casters.
For positives im glad they gave the ravager its range back and are working on the disruptor. Id like to see where they go with it. The liberator changes id have to see. Seems easier to integrate the bug in someway as its more interesting for gameplay
On July 14 2015 07:28 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: I feel that they are focusing to much on Terran, instead of Zerg and Protoss.
Terran is already in a good spot and has good design overall.
Zerg and Protoss still lack alot of stuff.
Zerg... Lacks... of Stuff???????
Zerg is in a very very good spot, LotV has brought in something that Zerg lacked, which is mid-game progression to Roach/Hydra.
What Zerg lacks is polishment. Ravager stats are very discussable even if the concept is okay, and there is still the problem of polishing Zerg casters and SH.
On July 14 2015 07:28 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: I feel that they are focusing to much on Terran, instead of Zerg and Protoss.
Terran is already in a good spot and has good design overall.
Zerg and Protoss still lack alot of stuff.
Zerg... Lacks... of Stuff???????
Zerg is in a very very good spot, LotV has brought in something that Zerg lacked, which is mid-game progression to Roach/Hydra.
What Zerg lacks is polishment. Ravager stats are very discussable even if the concept is okay, and there is still the problem of polishing Zerg casters and SH.
Abilitys and micro, more AA options... yes it does miss alot... it needs more then polish.
On July 14 2015 07:28 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: I feel that they are focusing to much on Terran, instead of Zerg and Protoss.
Terran is already in a good spot and has good design overall.
Zerg and Protoss still lack alot of stuff.
Zerg... Lacks... of Stuff???????
Zerg is in a very very good spot, LotV has brought in something that Zerg lacked, which is mid-game progression to Roach/Hydra.
What Zerg lacks is polishment. Ravager stats are very discussable even if the concept is okay, and there is still the problem of polishing Zerg casters and SH.
Abilitys and micro, more AA options... yes it does miss alot... it needs more then polish.
The whole game lacks micro, each race needs AA in some aspect. Abilities are overflowing for LotV across the board.
On July 14 2015 04:01 IntoTheheart wrote: Have they mentioned anything regarding their ladder system? Will it be just like the current one, or are they experimenting with stuff?
I really hope there are some changes. The HOTS ladder system was great for its time, but it feels a bit uninspired for the final entry of the game
On July 14 2015 05:18 PickyProtoss wrote: Shouldn't there be a system whereby contributions from community members are acknowledged and they get the game at a reduced price? In reality Blizzard are crowd sourcing game testers!!!
lol get real
it's not like this is even unique to blizzard, this is the direction games are going. why do you think everything is early access on steam?
if you think it's unfair then don't play and everyone who wants to play can keep playing without you. simple
Only an American could propose such obliviously neo-liberal ideas...
On July 14 2015 05:18 PickyProtoss wrote: Shouldn't there be a system whereby contributions from community members are acknowledged and they get the game at a reduced price? In reality Blizzard are crowd sourcing game testers!!!
lol get real
it's not like this is even unique to blizzard, this is the direction games are going. why do you think everything is early access on steam?
if you think it's unfair then don't play and everyone who wants to play can keep playing without you. simple
Only an American could propose such obliviously neo-liberal ideas...
you're playing a game for free, and early. In exchange Blizzard gets data. They don't owe you nothin bro
On July 14 2015 03:08 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: We’ve replaced the armor debuff drone ability with this version of Snipe.
Bug Fixes
[*]Build Bypass Armor Drone and Research Rapid Deployment now have hotkeys. [*]Bypass Armor Drone will now reacquire a target that has left and reentered its range. [*]Fixed an issue that caused the Bypass Armor Drone to not display it’s visual on a Stalker that used blink.
On July 14 2015 03:08 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: We’ve replaced the armor debuff drone ability with this version of Snipe.
Bug Fixes
[*]Build Bypass Armor Drone and Research Rapid Deployment now have hotkeys. [*]Bypass Armor Drone will now reacquire a target that has left and reentered its range. [*]Fixed an issue that caused the Bypass Armor Drone to not display it’s visual on a Stalker that used blink.
That's what I call bugfixing.
It seems the Armor Drone now is changed for the PDD on the Raven, that is why they mentioned those bug fixing, because the Ghost got the new Snipe but the Armor Drone is still in the game and has been moved to other unit
On July 14 2015 06:43 NyxNax wrote: I would like to throw out a change to the Disruptor, curious what you all think? I do not like the idea of Disruptors being invincible while activated, but losing a expensive supply eater instantly is not fun.. I also think this makes them a balancing nightmare. How do you find the right area of effect and damage vs cost/supply without being so detrimental if they just die? Will increasing the speed and lowering the AOE work?? I'm curious but very skeptical...
What if when activated their speed increases as usual, BUT they are Not invincible(maybe shield increase when activated?) and when they are killed they split into 2 smaller disruptors with less hp/shield and deal less damage. If killed while activated the 2 smaller ones would still be active and deal their damage as well as continue on their last command?.
Not only would this be pretty cool, well I think so anyway, but would increase the micro potential of both players(im sure David Kim would love) as well as give some sort of insurance for the protoss player that spent a bunch of resources and army supply. I also think this will be good for both pros and new players because right now it seems difficult for beginners but pros can out micro it. Speeding it up while being invincible so pros cant out micro it just seems harmful to the game..
If its a shit idea I'll own up to it, but it seems worth some experimenting
I suggest separating purification nova into two different abilities, making the temporary invulnerability a secondary disruptor skill. I think it would open up some great possibilities for protoss.
On July 14 2015 03:32 IeZaeL wrote: I really would like them to try out different versions of the disruptor, we are still in early beta afterall. What about instead of a single shot unit , they gained a persistent spinning attack which deals less damage than the nova , but it activates only when they reach a specific speed (3/4 ? ) , assuming they change its acceleration to take some time to reach maximum speed?
Hmmm thats a interesting idea, I agree that they should try different things though. This unit is going to be a balancing nightmare.. I dont like the invincibility, my idea was to have it not invincible, maybe gain shields when activated but when its destroyed it comes back as 2 smaller Disruptors each with less hp that deal less damage.
On July 14 2015 14:22 GGzerG wrote: Cmon Blizzard I want to Ladder please!!
? D: ?
Why comment twice on this?
I like all the changes.
Especially the ghost change, spec ops snipe things, its their main ability, not some weird floaty drone... That's not spec ops, idk what that is. PLUS, aiming takes time... 3 seconds is short even for a pro sniper.
"When the lore matches, it is true video game harmony."
Good changes overall. Ranked will bring more people playing, which will give blizzard more information.
Why remove the customization ability in the options menu, i.e Tool Tips and such. I'm talking about this one: " The following gameplay options are being removed from the menu and will permanently be active.
Display World Object Tooltips Display Game Tooltips. Display Hotkeys on Command Card. Enable Starting Worker Rally. Game Timer. "
Why in the world would you make the game less customizable by removing options? Just have the desired state set for a new player, while us old timers can choose the options we always have.
It seems the Armor Drone now is changed for the PDD on the Raven, that is why they mentioned those bug fixing, because the Ghost got the new Snipe but the Armor Drone is still in the game and has been moved to other unit
I think the bug fixes for Armour Drone is purely for map editor purposes.
* I really like the new Snipe, beforehand Ghost's have only been, either 3 with your SCV pull for the clutch EMP's, or Mass Ghost late game. Now Ghosts will be pretty bad in big numbers, but having few and giving them high attention, will be MUCH stronger.
* For the minimap changes, I think it would be nice if we could see Gold Bases from minimap also, in an easier manner than counting mineral patches.
* Combined Mech Amour Upgrade, I think instead of going back and forth all the time, maybe just make it 150/150 and have it be combined, similar to Ground Carapace.
* Liberator change is funny, since now the AoE will be much greater than it's vision range, which will make it similar to Siege Tanks in that you'd need spotters, for it's maximum potential. I think it's air attack still fits weirdly on the unit and the unit still seems out of place, but it's ground mode is really cool! so there's definitely potential in the unit. I think the fact that it's not Tech Lab required + too fast + not very durable, is what puts me off.
* I think turret tracking is also worth looking into, for the Cyclone standard attack.
Okay, after trying the ladder out for myself, I have come to the conclusion that if this is the economy model they go with, I will not be buying LotV. It is WAY TOO FAST. All it does it punish players who aren't high level, and makes the game more stressful to play. I this it does increase the skill ceiling, but it also raises the skill floor significantly to the point where a HotS Plat player like me can barely keep up with LotV at all.
On July 14 2015 17:04 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Okay, after trying the ladder out for myself, I have come to the conclusion that if this is the economy model they go with, I will not be buying LotV. It is WAY TOO FAST. All it does it punish players who aren't high level, and makes the game more stressful to play. I this it does increase the skill ceiling, but it also raises the skill floor significantly to the point where a HotS Plat player like me can barely keep up with LotV at all.
How many games have you played in LotV? Just want to make sure it is not just the novelty of things.
On July 14 2015 17:04 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Okay, after trying the ladder out for myself, I have come to the conclusion that if this is the economy model they go with, I will not be buying LotV. It is WAY TOO FAST. All it does it punish players who aren't high level, and makes the game more stressful to play. I this it does increase the skill ceiling, but it also raises the skill floor significantly to the point where a HotS Plat player like me can barely keep up with LotV at all.
How many games have you played in LotV? Just want to make sure it is not just the novelty of things.
I've probably played 15 games total, 6 tonight. And that's all I want to play because LotV doesn't fix core gameplay issues and just ads more stress to the equation.
On July 14 2015 17:04 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Okay, after trying the ladder out for myself, I have come to the conclusion that if this is the economy model they go with, I will not be buying LotV. It is WAY TOO FAST. All it does it punish players who aren't high level, and makes the game more stressful to play. I this it does increase the skill ceiling, but it also raises the skill floor significantly to the point where a HotS Plat player like me can barely keep up with LotV at all.
I'm at a decent enough skill/speed to keep up, but I don't enjoy it as much. It all feels rather rushed. I far prefer playing HotS atm, less gimmicky with a better pace to games.
On July 14 2015 17:04 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Okay, after trying the ladder out for myself, I have come to the conclusion that if this is the economy model they go with, I will not be buying LotV. It is WAY TOO FAST. All it does it punish players who aren't high level, and makes the game more stressful to play. I this it does increase the skill ceiling, but it also raises the skill floor significantly to the point where a HotS Plat player like me can barely keep up with LotV at all.
How many games have you played in LotV? Just want to make sure it is not just the novelty of things.
Agreed. I rarely play SC1 or 2 outside of LoTV. Yet I can handle the fast pace just fine after my first 5-10 games. Maybe Brood War prepared me for games with high skill floors because I don't think it's that bad.
For me problem with LotV is not that the game is too fast, that I actually like, but all the abilities of units. I preferred simple WoL over HotS, and now LotV is even worse (in my opinion!). There is a big chance I will buy LotV, but I just don't like it at this stage as I used to like SC2. I understand that it is BETA and lots of things will be changed, but general direction is to make the game more complicated, more buttons, more hotkeys. I am absolutely not a fun of this direction.
I am really not liking all of the super gimmicky units / abilities, adepts, tank drops, reaper mines to name a few, the gimmicky plays really just make me turned off. T_T
Okay I found something amazing (for me), but their new way to set up groups for archon mod... also work in 1c1. So, in that way, we finally have a useful way to set up control groups, and remove units from them to split the army.
How it works, for example: you have 20 roach in your group 3, and you want to split these in two. In HoTS, you have to either shift click each units, which is long and not very intuitive, or recreate two separate groups, but like this you lose the eggs and the rally units. Now you can select the 10 roach you want, do alt+control+2 and it will create the group of 10 roach in CG 2 AND automatically remove these 10 roach from the group 3.
On July 14 2015 17:04 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Okay, after trying the ladder out for myself, I have come to the conclusion that if this is the economy model they go with, I will not be buying LotV. It is WAY TOO FAST. All it does it punish players who aren't high level, and makes the game more stressful to play. I this it does increase the skill ceiling, but it also raises the skill floor significantly to the point where a HotS Plat player like me can barely keep up with LotV at all.
How many games have you played in LotV? Just want to make sure it is not just the novelty of things.
I've probably played 15 games total, 6 tonight. And that's all I want to play because LotV doesn't fix core gameplay issues and just ads more stress to the equation.
I am not alone! Also I suppose still lagging into US, so I do not have it on my disk anymore.
On July 14 2015 20:59 Vanadiel wrote: Okay I found something amazing (for me), but their new way to set up groups for archon mod... also work in 1c1. So, in that way, we finally have a useful way to set up control groups, and remove units from them to split the army.
How it works, for example: you have 20 roach in your group 3, and you want to split these in two. In HoTS, you have to either shift click each units, which is long and not very intuitive, or recreate two separate groups, but like this you lose the eggs and the rally units. Now you can select the 10 roach you want, do alt+control+2 and it will create the group of 10 roach in CG 2 AND automatically remove these 10 roach from the group 3.
On July 14 2015 20:59 Vanadiel wrote: Okay I found something amazing (for me), but their new way to set up groups for archon mod... also work in 1c1. So, in that way, we finally have a useful way to set up control groups, and remove units from them to split the army.
How it works, for example: you have 20 roach in your group 3, and you want to split these in two. In HoTS, you have to either shift click each units, which is long and not very intuitive, or recreate two separate groups, but like this you lose the eggs and the rally units. Now you can select the 10 roach you want, do alt+control+2 and it will create the group of 10 roach in CG 2 AND automatically remove these 10 roach from the group 3.
This is absolutely amazing and will have a real impact on the game, thanks for sharing .
On July 14 2015 21:56 VisionFlare wrote: What do you think about the Ravager Change? Will anyone use this unit now?
I just started playing LotV but when is going Ravager better than Hydra --> Lurker?
Defending against protoss timing I would say, ravager attack break forcefield and are out faster, plus now with their range they are more interesting.
But beside the forcefields? Maybe if you are already maxed out you can transform some roaches into ravagers, or you can just trade your roaches and reinforce some new ones.
On July 14 2015 17:04 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Okay, after trying the ladder out for myself, I have come to the conclusion that if this is the economy model they go with, I will not be buying LotV. It is WAY TOO FAST. All it does it punish players who aren't high level, and makes the game more stressful to play. I this it does increase the skill ceiling, but it also raises the skill floor significantly to the point where a HotS Plat player like me can barely keep up with LotV at all.
After reading the whiny posts of low skilled players saying that LOTV eco is too fast, I felt inspired to say that the way LOTV plays out has absolutely made me a better Starcraft player. It's harder, but it forces you to adjust to multiple base/army play.
On July 14 2015 20:59 Vanadiel wrote: Okay I found something amazing (for me), but their new way to set up groups for archon mod... also work in 1c1. So, in that way, we finally have a useful way to set up control groups, and remove units from them to split the army.
How it works, for example: you have 20 roach in your group 3, and you want to split these in two. In HoTS, you have to either shift click each units, which is long and not very intuitive, or recreate two separate groups, but like this you lose the eggs and the rally units. Now you can select the 10 roach you want, do alt+control+2 and it will create the group of 10 roach in CG 2 AND automatically remove these 10 roach from the group 3.
On July 14 2015 03:11 HmmmCookies wrote: Still no economy change? Come on Blizz get your...stuff...together!
Blizzard is most certainly aware that there are people unhappy with the current economy. It's kind of tiring to hear people complain about. No point in beating a dead horse. I'd rather here how you feel about the current changes and what impact it could have on the game.
On July 14 2015 04:25 blae000 wrote: I lose more and more interest for every post I read from blizz that does not include anything related to economy changes but does include "new ability"..
What's the consensus on the economy as far as the community is concerned?
Are most players enjoying it, hating it, indifferent?
I finally got into beta last week and even after my first game... my impression of the economy was "whoa... waaaay too fast". I'm not saying it would be impossible to adjust, I just had a far different impression when I heard the game would play out faster.
On July 14 2015 04:25 blae000 wrote: I lose more and more interest for every post I read from blizz that does not include anything related to economy changes but does include "new ability"..
What's the consensus on the economy as far as the community is concerned?
Are most players enjoying it, hating it, indifferent?
I finally got into beta last week and even after my first game... my impression of the economy was "whoa... waaaay too fast".
I still jump at how fast it takes until I hear "mineral field depleted", but I think we'll eventually come around to it. It took me like 3 months to get used to rallying workers to the minerals instead of between the nexus and mineral line like in BW.
On July 14 2015 04:25 blae000 wrote: I lose more and more interest for every post I read from blizz that does not include anything related to economy changes but does include "new ability"..
What's the consensus on the economy as far as the community is concerned?
Are most players enjoying it, hating it, indifferent?
I finally got into beta last week and even after my first game... my impression of the economy was "whoa... waaaay too fast".
IMO Most players are not playing LOTV, because it lags, no proper ladder, it is not balanced(duh!)...
And there is no consensus - some say the economy is good, some that it is bad. In the end we will see few months after the release. I am one of those who thinks this will be fail because casuals will leave the game leaving there only the HC elitists. (Yes, I think the game is way too fast now)
On July 15 2015 01:10 Marth93 wrote: Im sad. The old replays dont work with the new patch. Incompability again.
How can they intentionally break a feature that has been working for 5 years?
You are asking how a change in programming can break something else in the code? And yes, let's go ahead say the intentionally did it because "why not". This is why programmers get frustrated with people. Plus the replay feature has been constantly evolving over the past 5 years. It's not like the vanilla replay player is the one still being used today.
I for one, love the economy we have now. The speed of macro is what makes this game fun. With the addition of a ladder I will be certainly playing LOTV from now on.
I do not have a beta account, but I find it very sad that Terran streamers do not seem to even want to try out new units and strategies. Especially in TvP where it is the same old boring MMM bullshit that we have been seeing since Blizzard nerfed tanks in the WoL beta (!).
On July 15 2015 05:33 one-one-one wrote: I do not have a beta account, but I find it very sad that Terran streamers do not seem to even want to try out new units and strategies. Especially in TvP where it is the same old boring MMM bullshit that we have been seeing since Blizzard nerfed tanks in the WoL beta (!).
well after they split up the mech upgrades again and nerfed the cyclone to shit it is just not nearly as good as bio. cyclone needs to be able to hit air
On July 15 2015 05:33 one-one-one wrote: I do not have a beta account, but I find it very sad that Terran streamers do not seem to even want to try out new units and strategies. Especially in TvP where it is the same old boring MMM bullshit that we have been seeing since Blizzard nerfed tanks in the WoL beta (!).
well after they split up the mech upgrades again and nerfed the cyclone to shit it is just not nearly as good as bio. cyclone needs to be able to hit air
Yeah I guess. They should really remove the Thor from the game. It is such an awkward unit. Liberators can fill the AA splash damage role and cyclones can fill the air-to-ground attack role and also the high single target damage role to some extent.
Cyclones should really be balanced around the AA ability, but the Thor prevents this from being an option I fear.
Another thing I don't like is the attack animations of the Cyclone, Liberator and the Adept. The Liberator attack doesn't give the impression that splash damage is being dealt. You want to have some kind of shrapnel, smoke or shockwave animation for that. The valkyrie in BW is a good example.
The attack of the cyclone is barely visible. I wanna see some kick-ass rockets being fired. I think the missile turret could be a model for this. But I also wanna see a big smoke trail like real AA rockets.
The adept seems to throw some kind of ball or whatever. It feels way to simplistic and not awesome enough. I think the old version of the locust also suffered from this problem.
On July 15 2015 05:33 one-one-one wrote: I do not have a beta account, but I find it very sad that Terran streamers do not seem to even want to try out new units and strategies. Especially in TvP where it is the same old boring MMM bullshit that we have been seeing since Blizzard nerfed tanks in the WoL beta (!).
well after they split up the mech upgrades again and nerfed the cyclone to shit it is just not nearly as good as bio. cyclone needs to be able to hit air
Yeah I guess. They should really remove the Thor from the game. It is such an awkward unit. Liberators can fill the AA splash damage role and cyclones can fill the air-to-ground attack role and also the high single target damage role to some extent.
Cyclones should really be balanced around the AA ability, but the Thor prevents this from being an option I fear.
Another thing I don't like is the attack animations of the Cyclone, Liberator and the Adept. The Liberator attack doesn't give the impression that splash damage is being dealt. You want to have some kind of shrapnel, smoke or shockwave animation for that. The valkyrie in BW is a good example.
The attack of the cyclone is barely visible. I wanna see some kick-ass rockets being fired. I think the missile turret could be a model for this. But I also wanna see a big smoke trail like real AA rockets.
The adept seems to throw some kind of ball or whatever. It feels way to simplistic and not awesome enough. I think the old version of the locust also suffered from this problem.
i agree something needs to be done to the thor, its always been an underwhelming unit and mostly only used against mutas.
this patch overall seems pretty good. i think the adept should be nerfed and give the stalker some kind of a buff. protoss is good in the early game with adepts and in the later game with carriers but in between they are weak and slow.
On July 15 2015 05:33 one-one-one wrote: I do not have a beta account, but I find it very sad that Terran streamers do not seem to even want to try out new units and strategies. Especially in TvP where it is the same old boring MMM bullshit that we have been seeing since Blizzard nerfed tanks in the WoL beta (!).
well after they split up the mech upgrades again and nerfed the cyclone to shit it is just not nearly as good as bio. cyclone needs to be able to hit air
Yeah I guess. They should really remove the Thor from the game. It is such an awkward unit. Liberators can fill the AA splash damage role and cyclones can fill the air-to-ground attack role and also the high single target damage role to some extent.
Cyclones should really be balanced around the AA ability, but the Thor prevents this from being an option I fear.
Another thing I don't like is the attack animations of the Cyclone, Liberator and the Adept. The Liberator attack doesn't give the impression that splash damage is being dealt. You want to have some kind of shrapnel, smoke or shockwave animation for that. The valkyrie in BW is a good example.
The attack of the cyclone is barely visible. I wanna see some kick-ass rockets being fired. I think the missile turret could be a model for this. But I also wanna see a big smoke trail like real AA rockets.
The adept seems to throw some kind of ball or whatever. It feels way to simplistic and not awesome enough. I think the old version of the locust also suffered from this problem.
the cyclone really should have used the diamondback WoL campaign, with the laser/electrical attack. the standard attack could be a short burst fire, and then the lock-on would be the continuous beam that the original used. this would both be more unique and also help differentiate the 2 modes of attack more clearly.
On July 15 2015 05:33 one-one-one wrote: I do not have a beta account, but I find it very sad that Terran streamers do not seem to even want to try out new units and strategies. Especially in TvP where it is the same old boring MMM bullshit that we have been seeing since Blizzard nerfed tanks in the WoL beta (!).
well after they split up the mech upgrades again and nerfed the cyclone to shit it is just not nearly as good as bio. cyclone needs to be able to hit air
Yeah I guess. They should really remove the Thor from the game. It is such an awkward unit. Liberators can fill the AA splash damage role and cyclones can fill the air-to-ground attack role and also the high single target damage role to some extent.
Cyclones should really be balanced around the AA ability, but the Thor prevents this from being an option I fear.
Another thing I don't like is the attack animations of the Cyclone, Liberator and the Adept. The Liberator attack doesn't give the impression that splash damage is being dealt. You want to have some kind of shrapnel, smoke or shockwave animation for that. The valkyrie in BW is a good example.
The attack of the cyclone is barely visible. I wanna see some kick-ass rockets being fired. I think the missile turret could be a model for this. But I also wanna see a big smoke trail like real AA rockets.
The adept seems to throw some kind of ball or whatever. It feels way to simplistic and not awesome enough. I think the old version of the locust also suffered from this problem.
the cyclone really should have used the diamondback WoL campaign, with the laser/electrical attack. the standard attack could be a short burst fire, and then the lock-on would be the continuous beam that the original used. this would both be more unique and also help differentiate the 2 modes of attack more clearly.
Yeah would have been far better than the current underwhelming skin.
On July 15 2015 05:33 one-one-one wrote: I do not have a beta account, but I find it very sad that Terran streamers do not seem to even want to try out new units and strategies. Especially in TvP where it is the same old boring MMM bullshit that we have been seeing since Blizzard nerfed tanks in the WoL beta (!).
well after they split up the mech upgrades again and nerfed the cyclone to shit it is just not nearly as good as bio. cyclone needs to be able to hit air
Yeah I guess. They should really remove the Thor from the game. It is such an awkward unit. Liberators can fill the AA splash damage role and cyclones can fill the air-to-ground attack role and also the high single target damage role to some extent.
Cyclones should really be balanced around the AA ability, but the Thor prevents this from being an option I fear.
Another thing I don't like is the attack animations of the Cyclone, Liberator and the Adept. The Liberator attack doesn't give the impression that splash damage is being dealt. You want to have some kind of shrapnel, smoke or shockwave animation for that. The valkyrie in BW is a good example.
The attack of the cyclone is barely visible. I wanna see some kick-ass rockets being fired. I think the missile turret could be a model for this. But I also wanna see a big smoke trail like real AA rockets.
The adept seems to throw some kind of ball or whatever. It feels way to simplistic and not awesome enough. I think the old version of the locust also suffered from this problem.
i agree something needs to be done to the thor, its always been an underwhelming unit and mostly only used against mutas.
this patch overall seems pretty good. i think the adept should be nerfed and give the stalker some kind of a buff. protoss is good in the early game with adepts and in the later game with carriers but in between they are weak and slow.
I'm ok with a stalker buff as long as they nerf blink by increasing the time of the upgrade. The ability is a bit too strong in the opening stages of the game in the sense that it forces the terran to build a lot of bunkers. Bunkers synergize well with barracks and there you have a big reason as to why bio is the one and only viable strategy in SC2 vs protoss.
On July 15 2015 05:33 one-one-one wrote: I do not have a beta account, but I find it very sad that Terran streamers do not seem to even want to try out new units and strategies. Especially in TvP where it is the same old boring MMM bullshit that we have been seeing since Blizzard nerfed tanks in the WoL beta (!).
well after they split up the mech upgrades again and nerfed the cyclone to shit it is just not nearly as good as bio. cyclone needs to be able to hit air
Yeah I guess. They should really remove the Thor from the game. It is such an awkward unit. Liberators can fill the AA splash damage role and cyclones can fill the air-to-ground attack role and also the high single target damage role to some extent.
Cyclones should really be balanced around the AA ability, but the Thor prevents this from being an option I fear.
Another thing I don't like is the attack animations of the Cyclone, Liberator and the Adept. The Liberator attack doesn't give the impression that splash damage is being dealt. You want to have some kind of shrapnel, smoke or shockwave animation for that. The valkyrie in BW is a good example.
The attack of the cyclone is barely visible. I wanna see some kick-ass rockets being fired. I think the missile turret could be a model for this. But I also wanna see a big smoke trail like real AA rockets.
The adept seems to throw some kind of ball or whatever. It feels way to simplistic and not awesome enough. I think the old version of the locust also suffered from this problem.
the cyclone really should have used the diamondback WoL campaign, with the laser/electrical attack. the standard attack could be a short burst fire, and then the lock-on would be the continuous beam that the original used. this would both be more unique and also help differentiate the 2 modes of attack more clearly.
Yeah would have been far better than the current underwhelming skin.
I agree about the skin. It is really underwhelming. It feels like a C&C unit which is something you should not want. I still think it was a big mistake to hire the lead C&C developer to do Starcraft 2.
Some problems I had when playing (played 5 placement games, lost 3, got silver, ragequitted) :
1) lag. Unbearable from EU. 2) is it a side effect of sight of range change, but when given an attack move command units run into mines without attacking them, even with detection. 3) "play again" (score screen) is unranked by default ; I wanted to chain ranked games, ended up playing more games than I needed. 4) F commands on menu screen to access campaign/matchmaking etc don't work. 5) The map pool is just... bad. I don't know how Blizz hopes to be able to assess something on such wanky maps, unless those are going to become the new standard, which would be worrying.
Sadly the lag already makes the game a really unpleasant experience. That combined to the overwhelming weakness of Protoss are enough to make me walk out of the beta... again. HotS is just far more interesting in its current state in my opinion, and it's playable. I'll probably come back to the beta during the offseason after Blizzcon though, hoping that the game will have improved in the meantime.
On July 14 2015 06:43 NyxNax wrote: I would like to throw out a change to the Disruptor, curious what you all think? I do not like the idea of Disruptors being invincible while activated, but losing a expensive supply eater instantly is not fun.. I also think this makes them a balancing nightmare. How do you find the right area of effect and damage vs cost/supply without being so detrimental if they just die? Will increasing the speed and lowering the AOE work?? I'm curious but very skeptical...
What if when activated their speed increases as usual, BUT they are Not invincible(maybe shield increase when activated?) and when they are killed they split into 2 smaller disruptors with less hp/shield and deal less damage. If killed while activated the 2 smaller ones would still be active and deal their damage as well as continue on their last command?.
Not only would this be pretty cool, well I think so anyway, but would increase the micro potential of both players(im sure David Kim would love) as well as give some sort of insurance for the protoss player that spent a bunch of resources and army supply. I also think this will be good for both pros and new players because right now it seems difficult for beginners but pros can out micro it. Speeding it up while being invincible so pros cant out micro it just seems harmful to the game..
If its a shit idea I'll own up to it, but it seems worth some experimenting
I suggest separating purification nova into two different abilities, making the temporary invulnerability a secondary disruptor skill. I think it would open up some great possibilities for protoss.
Ya know thats actually not a bad idea, or make it an upgrade or something. But I dont think making it faster when activated and its AOE smaller is going to fix it. Its still an expensive unit that takes a lot of supply. Like with a couple other units in SC2, I wonder if just making it smaller, cheaper, less damage would fix it. No matter how they try and balance the damage/AOE right now, its still gonna come down to if it does damage it was worth it, if it doesnt do damage your way behind, unless its just something you incorporate in the late game.
Random - Since it was revealed I've thought of the Disruptor as a controllable Reaver shot., and now I cant get the Reaver outta my head when thinkin about the Disruptor.. Wonder what it'd be like if the Reaver replaced it... Maybe make the Reaver shells able to be destroyed with an upgrade to increase their shields or the speed of the shot..
On July 14 2015 17:04 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Okay, after trying the ladder out for myself, I have come to the conclusion that if this is the economy model they go with, I will not be buying LotV. It is WAY TOO FAST. All it does it punish players who aren't high level, and makes the game more stressful to play. I this it does increase the skill ceiling, but it also raises the skill floor significantly to the point where a HotS Plat player like me can barely keep up with LotV at all.
I said this before in prior beta threads. The new economy will kill Gold league and below, for the reasons you've stated. Low level players will not want to play this quickly. Since the majority of players are at the bottom, I'm worried the game will become too niche (ie, hardcore).
On July 14 2015 17:04 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Okay, after trying the ladder out for myself, I have come to the conclusion that if this is the economy model they go with, I will not be buying LotV. It is WAY TOO FAST. All it does it punish players who aren't high level, and makes the game more stressful to play. I this it does increase the skill ceiling, but it also raises the skill floor significantly to the point where a HotS Plat player like me can barely keep up with LotV at all.
I said this before in prior beta threads. The new economy will kill Gold league and below, for the reasons you've stated. Low level players will not want to play this quickly. Since the majority of players are at the bottom, I'm worried the game will become too niche (ie, hardcore).
Why speak for gold level players? It is all speculation. I'd like to see vanilla and low teir players get their hands on the beta and truly see how they respond. It's kind of hard to say this will punish low level players when their opponent is also low level and has the same disadvantages. We have no data to make the assumptions in either direction.
On July 14 2015 04:25 blae000 wrote: I lose more and more interest for every post I read from blizz that does not include anything related to economy changes but does include "new ability"..
Posts like this and other posts I read at the blizz forums with content such as: "toss still not fixed" "economy still not changed" "toss still not deleted" "terran still imba" "terran still M&M&M tier 1 bullshit" A. Isn't constructive. B. Adds to the toxic sphere right now in the community. C. Completely bypasses the fact that LOTV is still months away and might bring the change you want. D. Completely bypasses the fact that most of the people in this comment thread can't even play the beta yet and are either theory crafting or going by beta tournaments they saw on streams.
Sure; your allowed to debate. Sure; you are allowed to voice your opinion. But at least be constructive and mature about it instead of throwing a tantrum that you aren't getting change x you want so badly.
I agree with this, half of the economy and Protoss design whiners are all the same exact people posting the exact same thing on multiple threads, I question sometimes if these people even play the beta or if they just sit there and theory craft.
By the way, for my constructive post on the matter
1. Zealot Legs at Twilight Council/Charge removed from game so Zealots can be fast and benefit from great control, Charge is stupid, A move, and to make Charge NOT stupid requires weird design changes, just be done with it, it sucks.
2. Adept shield upgrade changed to + dmg vs. armored or chain damage they are tanky enough they just get outclassed the further the game goes they need a little "bump" in the mid to late game.
3. Stalkers are awesome, don't touch them, anyone that says otherwise hasn't faced blink/sentry.
Why don't people get this... YOU CANNOT REMOVE CHARGE AND KEEP CONCUSSIVE SHELLS. I'm all for faster Zealots that can be microed etc. but concussive shells flat out kill any micro potential.
I feel like Concussive Shells is a bandaid gone wrong anyway. In the early game it helps you survive, especially against gateway all-ins, because it allows you to micro more easily even against units that are faster than your own (pre stim and medivacs), while later on it just removes micro potential for the opponents (while yours is in tact through stim and medivacs) and often allows you to kill units for free.
On July 14 2015 17:04 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Okay, after trying the ladder out for myself, I have come to the conclusion that if this is the economy model they go with, I will not be buying LotV. It is WAY TOO FAST. All it does it punish players who aren't high level, and makes the game more stressful to play. I this it does increase the skill ceiling, but it also raises the skill floor significantly to the point where a HotS Plat player like me can barely keep up with LotV at all.
I said this before in prior beta threads. The new economy will kill Gold league and below, for the reasons you've stated. Low level players will not want to play this quickly. Since the majority of players are at the bottom, I'm worried the game will become too niche (ie, hardcore).
Why speak for gold level players? It is all speculation. I'd like to see vanilla and low teir players get their hands on the beta and truly see how they respond. It's kind of hard to say this will punish low level players when their opponent is also low level and has the same disadvantages. We have no data to make the assumptions in either direction.
^ This. In HotS - I'm a gold league player at the moment. My mechanics are average to bad and I play random on the Ladder so I generally have an idea of all build orders for all three matchups + mirrors.
What decides who wins or loses the games I play is army composition, supply and builder orders...never the economy. The times we gold league players expand are so varied from the optimal expansion timing combined with our terrible macro, I very much doubt a sped up economy / less mineral patches will stop us from playing the game.
I'll give you an example, played a ZvZ yesterday on bridgehead and it was 3 base (him) vs 5 base (me). We engaged armies at 200/200 supply with Roach/Hydra (3/2) vs Roach/Hydra/Viper (2/2) (me). Despite getting two really good binding clouds off, I lost the engagement due to a poor concave and the upgrade difference and was forced to retreat to my spines. When he counter attacked (about a min later) I was already rallying new units + my 3/3 had completed combined with the spines I easily held it off. I maxed out to 200/200 again (5 bases with lots of larvae...really quick) walked over to the otherside and killed him.
Point I'm trying to make is that the lower leagues...resources isn't so much of the problem. It's making the right mix of units, positioning and knowing where to attack. If the dude went and attacked my 5th base while running lings to the backdoor rocks that he broke down earlier in the game... I'd have probably lost the game. But hey, we're gold league so we make stupid decisions lol.
I hope I can get a beta invite, along with some other goldies. I'm more curious to see how 2v2s, 3v3s and 4v4s will play out with the economy changes. I suspect that's where /ragequit stuff is gonna happen for sure.
Complaining about changes being bad for low level players doesn't seem relevant to me. Raising the skill floor and ceiling is, at this point, the only way to make SC2 a better game. The systematic casual-izing of their products is what has brought Blizzard to its current mediocrity. I like the new snipe, it's a lot more Ghost-ish than the uber-retarded drone ability they tried to implement. I don't like the fact that they don't even consider changing the Liberator's model. It's almost as horrible and underwhelming as their air2air attack animation (ye, better change that too).
Now change the new Snipe to become Lockdown vs Mech and massive burst vs Bio and I'll agree they did a proper job to make the unit useful and not overly specialized.
On July 14 2015 03:26 pieroog wrote: I like those changes a lot (especially to Disruptor) but..... isn't 170dmg with a Ghost's Snipe too much?
170 seems alrght:
Kills any Terran bio unit (Marine, Marauder, Ghost, Reaper, SCV, Hellbat) and any Protoss bio unit (Zealot, HT, DT, Adept) in one shot. Assuming it has a balanced energy cost or the 3 second thing ends up being a big deal, the only real targets for those two races are the spellcasters and DT's. And 3 seconds means they can cast some spells or have a chance to interrupt the damage.
So really it's a TvZ-focused spell, and would especially be useful for the new ultras (3 snipes = ded ultra). Could also deal with Lurkers or Brood Lords, not killing them outright but getting them close enough so that either a second snipe or a few auxiliary forces can deal with them easily. Think 2012 fungal vs. lings, baneling vs drones or BW storm vs lurker/muta. So I like this direction.
It's gonna be scarier than you thought it would be:
- Although it can be cancelled during the 3-second channelling, a ghost can snipe while cloaked. That makes it very difficult to stop it if the overseer gets sniped first. - Only 25 energy cost, which allows ghost to fire one shot after another and remain cloaked. - Based on the description, there's no escape!
On July 14 2015 03:08 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Added minimap icons for destructible rocks and towers
With the high rate at which maps rotate in and out of the ladder, we wanted to give some support in this area for Void. These were the two main things that were missing on the minimap, so we’ve added icons to indicate where the destructible units are on the map.
that's nice, but I don't get how it is related to map rotation speed, which they again state to be high, half a year on average seems pretty slow to me.
On July 14 2015 17:04 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Okay, after trying the ladder out for myself, I have come to the conclusion that if this is the economy model they go with, I will not be buying LotV. It is WAY TOO FAST. All it does it punish players who aren't high level, and makes the game more stressful to play. I this it does increase the skill ceiling, but it also raises the skill floor significantly to the point where a HotS Plat player like me can barely keep up with LotV at all.
I said this before in prior beta threads. The new economy will kill Gold league and below, for the reasons you've stated. Low level players will not want to play this quickly. Since the majority of players are at the bottom, I'm worried the game will become too niche (ie, hardcore).
Why speak for gold level players? It is all speculation. I'd like to see vanilla and low teir players get their hands on the beta and truly see how they respond. It's kind of hard to say this will punish low level players when their opponent is also low level and has the same disadvantages. We have no data to make the assumptions in either direction.
I am platinum in HotS and consider myself pretty bad, yet I enjoy LotV. At the current state I enjoy LotV even more than HoTS, because it lacks what irritates me in HotS the most - highly refined all-ins. On one hand yes, this is going to change with time as people get better at this, on the other hand the 12-worker start makes it seem a little bit harder to do. If something is really unfriendly to casual players, it is these refined attacks that require a precise response, else you are dead.
Also, after getting back to HotS for a while, I noticed that a really big difference for me is the Lurker. In HotS there is not really unit "go-to" unit that I could get no matter what and have a good time with, I really need to watch the enemy vigorously and think about the right composition, everything has strong weaknesses. Not the Lurker, it just shreds everything on the ground beynd belief - that's probably a bad thing competitively, but for casual play, it really makes things so much easier to have this "if you don't know what to do, build some Lurkers".
The economy is not that different, really. If you suck at macro in HotS, you suck at LotV - in both games you get equally sucky oponents, so there is not that much difference. On the other hand, in LotV there is actually a bigger room to do better in macro and expanding and thus you have more space to defeat your oponent just by macroing better and amoving the units in their general direciton, which is much easier in my opinion that vigorously microing armies to get that small edge.
- Only 25 energy cost, which allows ghost to fire one shot after another and remain cloaked.
Eh, don't think it will maintain its energy cost.
What if it does? As it was mentioned, 3 second is a long time. It takes about the equal amount of time to siege or unsiege a tank, and we all know what difference can these three seconds make. So, if you want to cast it safely, cloak is a must.
That being said, I think ghost should have a skill that disables a single target like Zeratul's in the WoL campaign, a lockdown against bio - including spines and spores, perhaps - instead of mech units. That would be much more effective against ultras.
I dislike the direction the Liberator is taking. There is already the Banshee and BC as air to ground. To much overlapping now, like with the Factory and Cyclone-Tank-Thor. If Terran needs a stronger long range siege weapon, buff the Tank. This is not C&C where you have 10 units that do the same thing is slightly different ways, it Starcraft FFS
On July 15 2015 17:56 Sapphire.lux wrote: I dislike the direction the Liberator is taking. There is already the Banshee and BC as air to ground. To much overlapping now, like with the Factory and Cyclone-Tank-Thor. If Terran needs a stronger long range siege weapon, buff the Tank. This is not C&C where you have 10 units that do the same thing is slightly different ways, it Starcraft FFS
Isn't the tank buffed already? You can now have it perfectly blended in the bioball play.
On July 14 2015 17:04 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Okay, after trying the ladder out for myself, I have come to the conclusion that if this is the economy model they go with, I will not be buying LotV. It is WAY TOO FAST. All it does it punish players who aren't high level, and makes the game more stressful to play. I this it does increase the skill ceiling, but it also raises the skill floor significantly to the point where a HotS Plat player like me can barely keep up with LotV at all.
I said this before in prior beta threads. The new economy will kill Gold league and below, for the reasons you've stated. Low level players will not want to play this quickly. Since the majority of players are at the bottom, I'm worried the game will become too niche (ie, hardcore).
I do not understand this statement. If the game is harder for everybody, (and it is), then it simply means that you AND the opponent will struggle. You seem to forget that everybody has to deal with the higher skill ceiling, that implies bronze will stay bronze as will diamond stay diamond. I actually really disliked the fact that the first 5 minutes of the game were such a waste of times if you don´t to proxy shit, and thats why i enjoy much more the LotV version. Not saying the current state is optimal, just much better for me personally as a player and even more as a viewer. Of course everbody has a different opinion and that is why we are discussing.
On July 14 2015 17:04 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Okay, after trying the ladder out for myself, I have come to the conclusion that if this is the economy model they go with, I will not be buying LotV. It is WAY TOO FAST. All it does it punish players who aren't high level, and makes the game more stressful to play. I this it does increase the skill ceiling, but it also raises the skill floor significantly to the point where a HotS Plat player like me can barely keep up with LotV at all.
I said this before in prior beta threads. The new economy will kill Gold league and below, for the reasons you've stated. Low level players will not want to play this quickly. Since the majority of players are at the bottom, I'm worried the game will become too niche (ie, hardcore).
I do not understand this statement. If the game is harder for everybody, (and it is), then it simply means that you AND the opponent will struggle. You seem to forget that everybody has to deal with the higher skill ceiling, that implies bronze will stay bronze as will diamond stay diamond. I actually really disliked the fact that the first 5 minutes of the game were such a waste of times if you don´t to proxy shit, and thats why i enjoy much more the LotV version. Not saying the current state is optimal, just much better for me personally as a player and even more as a viewer. Of course everbody has a different opinion and that is why we are discussing.
The thing with the "it's harder for everyone" line of thought is that this is plainly from a competitive point of view. But that doesnt make it more enjoyable or justifies playing starcraft. People are rather noobs in LoL than noobs in starcraft, because starcraft is too hard for noobs to feel like "playing". (and other reasons of course too)
OK I gave the game a chance and actually very few things should be required for the game to be playable as P.
1) Remove one of the range or damage nerf on the colossus. You can't rely on disruptors and storms solely against T. 2) Nerf adepts so that they don't dominate every mu early game (PvP and PvZ lol). They can stay as they are lategame. 3) Nerf lurkers (may not be needed if 1 is range).
I have no idea about design but the game would be playable with those slight tweaks.
I guess Z drops should be lair tech but maybe this is fine, I dunno. I would definitely make sieged tanks loadable but they would lose siege when dropped too, but that doesn't affect P too much I'd say.
Does anyone else feel mines trigger much easier than before with the indicator ? By the way I'm overwhelmed by all the indicators (mines, cyclones, tempests...) they should really make it customizable IMO.
On July 14 2015 17:04 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Okay, after trying the ladder out for myself, I have come to the conclusion that if this is the economy model they go with, I will not be buying LotV. It is WAY TOO FAST. All it does it punish players who aren't high level, and makes the game more stressful to play. I this it does increase the skill ceiling, but it also raises the skill floor significantly to the point where a HotS Plat player like me can barely keep up with LotV at all.
I said this before in prior beta threads. The new economy will kill Gold league and below, for the reasons you've stated. Low level players will not want to play this quickly. Since the majority of players are at the bottom, I'm worried the game will become too niche (ie, hardcore).
Why speak for gold level players? It is all speculation. I'd like to see vanilla and low teir players get their hands on the beta and truly see how they respond. It's kind of hard to say this will punish low level players when their opponent is also low level and has the same disadvantages. We have no data to make the assumptions in either direction.
I am platinum in HotS and consider myself pretty bad, yet I enjoy LotV. At the current state I enjoy LotV even more than HoTS, because it lacks what irritates me in HotS the most - highly refined all-ins. On one hand yes, this is going to change with time as people get better at this, on the other hand the 12-worker start makes it seem a little bit harder to do. If something is really unfriendly to casual players, it is these refined attacks that require a precise response, else you are dead.
Also, after getting back to HotS for a while, I noticed that a really big difference for me is the Lurker. In HotS there is not really unit "go-to" unit that I could get no matter what and have a good time with, I really need to watch the enemy vigorously and think about the right composition, everything has strong weaknesses. Not the Lurker, it just shreds everything on the ground beynd belief - that's probably a bad thing competitively, but for casual play, it really makes things so much easier to have this "if you don't know what to do, build some Lurkers".
The economy is not that different, really. If you suck at macro in HotS, you suck at LotV - in both games you get equally sucky oponents, so there is not that much difference. On the other hand, in LotV there is actually a bigger room to do better in macro and expanding and thus you have more space to defeat your oponent just by macroing better and amoving the units in their general direciton, which is much easier in my opinion that vigorously microing armies to get that small edge.
I am Gold league, and while I haven't gotten to play very much, I have definitely enjoyed LotV 1v1 waaaay more than HotS so far. I stopped playing 1v1 in HotS quite a while ago (because I suck), but LotV might just get me back into it. The big things for me are (1) the adept makes playing Protoss early game 100% more fun and far less stressful, (2) the econ changes seems to create more small-scale action out on the map, whether I win or lose, which is more fun for people who suck than the experience of slowly building up an army that's not quite good enough and then gets crushed completely in one engagement, ending the game. Having to expand a little earlier isn't a big deal for me, especially since at the level I play expansions don't seem to be as seriously contested as they are at higher levels. I guess if I were a turtle player who liked massing up BCs on two bases, then I might be more unhappy. But I dunno, even that is still possible, it's just a heck of a lot weaker.
Of course, some of this may have to do with people on the beta just being worse. But still, as a Gold leaguer, I'm happy so far.
I really dislike the current state of mech right now.
With split upgrades and the tanks still being shit mass cyclone/hellion is the only really good strat, the only use for the rest of the mech army is to stay alive unitl you have the economy and upgrades for mass cyclone.
On July 16 2015 01:54 Lexender wrote: I really dislike the current state of mech right now.
With split upgrades and the tanks still being shit mass cyclone/hellion is the only really good strat, the only use for the rest of the mech army is to stay alive unitl you have the economy and upgrades for mass cyclone.
Doesn't tank dropping still work? I saw Pomi use it on his stream once, absolutely massacred his opponent with it.
Have there been any concrete beta builds for T/Z yet? I might switch from Protoss to Random in the beta.
I really, really dislike how people complain about everything in this thread, I harrased a guy yesterday with adepts while expanding on the back so I Could afford a disruptor and practically won the game with the disruptor, this guy was standing there like a moron with his army like he would do on HOTS and obviusly he blamed on the OPNESS of the disruptor instead of being just standing in the map without movement, its like standing on tank radius why would you do that?, or fighting a tank push on your shoke with stalkers the game is fine, but some people want to produce just marines and win, and if they dont fill the forums, with shit FFS learn the game
On July 15 2015 17:56 Sapphire.lux wrote: I dislike the direction the Liberator is taking. There is already the Banshee and BC as air to ground. To much overlapping now, like with the Factory and Cyclone-Tank-Thor. If Terran needs a stronger long range siege weapon, buff the Tank. This is not C&C where you have 10 units that do the same thing is slightly different ways, it Starcraft FFS
I thought they said they would combined the mech armor upgrades or was the just what there thinking about? also is it just me or should the liberator need a tech lab idk if its that good yet havent played enough games to know but being about to reactor them out is kinda silly for an anti air and ground unit. its not OP at least from the games ive played but idk if its ok without tech lab will play more and see. last NO more LAG for me atleast not every game I can finally play and ive had beta for a while.
The lag with LOTV beta is alot worse than HOTS connecting from Australia to US servers. If you could match the network performance (lag) of HOTS for LOTV beta I would actually play the beta.
Does anyone else feel like the reaper grenade ability really looks out of place ? The units jumping all over the place taking only very small damage seems so... strange.
On July 16 2015 11:54 [PkF] Wire wrote: Does anyone else feel like the reaper grenade ability really looks out of place ? The units jumping all over the place taking only very small damage seems so... strange.
A couple of reapers may be a pain in the ass in the early game, but nonetheless the reaper's role is for scout which doesn't make much of a difference. No way could you blow up the entire enemy base with nothing but reapers and their anti-building grenades like it used to be in WoL.
Maybe not the right thread: Why can´t I get higher then level 5 for each race? I see people with a profile level of 30+ and I´m stuck at 15. Is this a momentary bug, since yesterday I was level 16 XD
On July 16 2015 11:54 [PkF] Wire wrote: Does anyone else feel like the reaper grenade ability really looks out of place ? The units jumping all over the place taking only very small damage seems so... strange.
A couple of reapers may be a pain in the ass in the early game, but nonetheless the reaper's role is for scout which doesn't make much of a difference. No way could you blow up the entire enemy base with nothing but reapers and their anti-building grenades like it used to be in WoL.
I'm not saying it's OP or anything, just that the animation looks silly. You take a huge knockback and only 10 damage too, which doesn't seem really logical.
I think the remove from control group function is good, but not done perfectly. I wish they had it as alt-# remove from group, alt-control-# remove and create group, alt-shift-# remove and add to group. Just because I remove units from a group doesn't mean that I want to put it in a new group.
EPT![[image loading]](http://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/blog_header/6IAXORGNGQC81426688145552.jpg)
.
.
