EPTIt's an area denial unit with a major emphasis on positioning, something that a lot of people have been clamoring for in this game.
Liberator in TVZ : is it imba? - Page 22
| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
TheWinks
United States572 Posts
It's an area denial unit with a major emphasis on positioning, something that a lot of people have been clamoring for in this game. | ||
|
CheddarToss
534 Posts
| ||
|
jpg06051992
United States580 Posts
The air to ground thing needs a nerf badly, the radius is just huge and not only does it allow silly all ins it also enables cancer mech turtle capabilities. Plus, it's reactored, hits your base stupidly fast, kills overlords, kills things on the ground with ease, even trades well vs. Mutalisks. Why does a Starport unit that good at everything need to be mass produced? Imagine how broken the Banshee would be if it could be fucking reactored or if a Vikings ground mode was as strong as a stimmed Marauder? It would just be OP, so there is no reason for one unit to be so dominant against everything. Why build tanks with Liberators? It does their job twice as good and can be reactored Literally why ever build banshees or Thors with Liberators. Why build Mutalisks in ZvT if Liberators are on the field. | ||
|
TimeSpiral
United States1010 Posts
On September 07 2015 07:09 Ovid wrote: Oh for sure don't get me wrong, I said "you could say" but still the effect is very similar I used that example because it over exaggerates the problem to highlight my point. I pretty much despise all the features of this unit, if someone said here's an idea guys I make something that has 15 range and does 75 damage a shot every 1 second would you say that sounds balanced or would you laugh and say that's broken as shit. + Show Spoiler + Yes I understand you have to be inside the circle but those are still its stats. I hear ya. It would be like saying that each larva effectively halves the production time of all units produced by Zerg ; ) But nobody would say that. Ooooh, but I really like the game you started. "Imagine if I described this!" Let's try ... (1) Imagine if you could cast a spell one time, and infinitely iterate invisible buildings that scout vision and provide AOE speed bonuses to every friendly unit! It doesn't cost money. Or supply. Cast it once, and it's free for the rest of the game! Bahaha. Broken as shit, brah! (2) Imagine if you had a unit, with a unit-centered range of 9 (i.e., Colossus with ETL), that was invisible while attacking, that caused a massive 30 line-AOE damage, and attacked every 1.43 game seconds! Bahahaha. Broken as shit, brah! You get it. The Liberator can place it's targeting system with a range of 15, but its effective range in the targeted area is obviously much less, and you get an on-screen warning. You get a warning! Name a single Zerg or Protoss unit that gives the opponent a "Hey, you're walking into range!" warning. What is the range from the center of the zone, like 5-6? Like, a Marine's range? CheddarToss said it. With all the new toys everyone else got, Terran would be way up shit's creek without this new airship (or something similarly useful). But don't worry. It will get nerfed hard. Super hard. | ||
|
CheddarToss
534 Posts
On September 07 2015 07:39 TimeSpiral wrote: CheddarToss said it. With all the new toys everyone else got, Terran would be way up shit's creek without this new airship (or something similarly useful). But don't worry. It will get nerfed hard. Super hard. As a terran player you should be happy if Blizz decides to nerf it and buff other units a little, to compensate. Do you really want to have colossi in your army and to be dead the moment your opponent snipes them? Isn't it better to have several units, which are usable without the super unit? I'm really happy that colossi are a thing of the past. I like the new protoss more and would find it sad if terran were to end up with a colossus-like unit. | ||
|
TimeSpiral
United States1010 Posts
On September 07 2015 07:49 CheddarToss wrote: As a terran player you should be happy if Blizz decides to nerf it and buff other units a little, to compensate. Do you really want to have colossi in your army and to be dead the moment your opponent snipes them? Isn't it better to have several units, which are usable without the super unit? I'm really happy that colossi are a thing of the past. I like the new protoss more and would find it sad if terran were to end up with a colossus-like unit. Yes. I completely agree with you. But mark my words: Liberator will get nerfed, and we will not get a single unit buff. I mean, they completely removed the MULE and didn't buff a single unit, upgrade, or building, lol. If a single barracks unit or non-Cyclone factory unit gets buffed, I will eat my shoe. We'll probably see something like +0.4 movement speed upgrade for the BC in the FC. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20322 Posts
even 60/40 game balance is a big problem in competitive play. That's nearly at the point where you can take two players of equal skill and one of them will be expected to win three out of four bo7's series because of statistics alone. | ||
BluemoonSC
SoCal8910 Posts
On September 07 2015 06:32 Ovid wrote: People are complaining about reactors in the context of liberators as per the point of the thread. A liberator normally has 43 second build time, with reactor you could say each one builds every 21 seconds that is the same build time as a marauder and the power difference between the two is huge. The timing of this unit is too fast they've identified that much at least. The main issue though in my mind is the overlap with other units, a siege tank is the ultimate positional ground unit or at least it should be, but they're just much less effective than a liberator. Liberator also is just ugly, that's an opinion but I just think it's too large/clunky and just doesn't look Terran to me. Sorry to the artist that put his time into it but it could just be 1000x better. Easy, there. You cannot say that a liberator has a 21sec build time just bc you can produce 2 at the same time. If you built 2 naked starports the build time would still be the same as a starport with a reactor. | ||
Ryndika
1489 Posts
| ||
|
zelderan
United States163 Posts
On September 08 2015 17:05 Ryndika wrote: It forces corruptor,broodlord,infestor shit because corruptor is the only unit that can attack it so it's kind of meh unit. It should be nerfed enough to allow different choices for zerg so game stays more fun for more people. If anything I feel corruptors are pretty bad against them because of the AoE that liberators give. As a zerg you need to get a shitton of corruptors up to even have an effect on them. Not getting that critical mass of corruptors means nothing when 5-10 liberators can demolish anything, air or ground. Corruptors are absolutely not the answer to early/mid game liberator/hellion/hellbat harass. There lies the problem for the unit. What zergs are having to do now is having a ton of spores/queens and one to two ravagers per base which is downright stupid. The unit as a whole needs to be balanced, be it prolonging air to ground mode or decreasing damage done to ground. | ||
|
TimeSpiral
United States1010 Posts
On September 09 2015 07:03 zelderan wrote: If anything I feel corruptors are pretty bad against them because of the AoE that liberators give. As a zerg you need to get a shitton of corruptors up to even have an effect on them. Not getting that critical mass of corruptors means nothing when 5-10 liberators can demolish anything, air or ground. Corruptors are absolutely not the answer to early/mid game liberator/hellion/hellbat harass. There lies the problem for the unit. What zergs are having to do now is having a ton of spores/queens and one to two ravagers per base which is downright stupid. The unit as a whole needs to be balanced, be it prolonging air to ground mode or decreasing damage done to ground. This is all just *shrugs*. There are numerous "he built [THIS] so I have to build [THAT]" scenarios. That is kinda what Starcraft 2 is, to a large extent. | ||
|
TheWinks
United States572 Posts
On September 09 2015 07:03 zelderan wrote: If anything I feel corruptors are pretty bad against them because of the AoE that liberators give. Minimal splitting and micro in a pure liberator vs corruptor situationmakes for extremely cost effective engagements. | ||
|
DMKraft
476 Posts
On September 07 2015 19:48 BluemoonSC wrote: Easy, there. You cannot say that a liberator has a 21sec build time just bc you can produce 2 at the same time. If you built 2 naked starports the build time would still be the same as a starport with a reactor. Corrupter have a 2 second build time when the build 20 at once  . | ||
|
parkufarku
882 Posts
On September 09 2015 08:11 TimeSpiral wrote: This is all just *shrugs*. There are numerous "he built [THIS] so I have to build [THAT]" scenarios. That is kinda what Starcraft 2 is, to a large extent. Nice argument. He describes how AoE shreds the composition and you just shrug and imply that X beats O so it doesn't really matter. We all try to have fruitful discussions in this thread and you come here to attempt to downplay anything that will give the Terran race a nerf. Classy. | ||
|
Ryndika
1489 Posts
| ||
|
TimeSpiral
United States1010 Posts
On September 09 2015 10:41 parkufarku wrote: Nice argument. He describes how AoE shreds the composition and you just shrug and imply that X beats O so it doesn't really matter. We all try to have fruitful discussions in this thread and you come here to attempt to downplay anything that will give the Terran race a nerf. Classy. Man, you've really got it out for me, Parkufarku. Ever since I politely encouraged you to stay on topic in one of my OPs. My goodness. Chill out. I've many comments on this thread, if you're looking for a more articulated argument, maybe pick one of those? But you really don't engage me in an arguments with points. I suppose your criticism of flippancy is fair. I could have been more detailed. So: it irked me that he is basically saying, "I have to do [X] response, if my opponent does [Y]." That sort of argument should be shrugged, should it not? Unless, of course, the response is way out of proportion. He then goes on to describe how to deal with the Liberator, in the same breath. And he got it right, too! Spores, Queens, Ravagers ... these are non-Spire ways to deal with Liberators. If an opponent is demonstrating that he will focus on harass play, is it not an appropriate response for you to defend your bases? If the opponent is using air units, would you not focus that defense on AA, such as Spores, Queens, and Ravagers (if you're not going to respond to Starport with Spire)? Maybe you think this dedication to defense is too much, or unfair? Have you ever seen what a Terran has to do to defend Muta harass, or Ling run bies, or burrowed harass, or nydus? When someone is very harass oriented, or stressing your multitasking abilities, it's tough to deal with. That's the point of this demanding style of play. This is my opinion, of course, but the Liberator's effective harass window is small, and this is why Terrans literally sacrifice everything to rush them out. But the tears have run thick, and this timing window is going to be nerfed--good job, guys!--making it even smaller. After this window is closed, Zerg should have caught on to the play and responded, no? Or, is your argument that not only is the rush play unfair, but battling this unit in army compositions is also unfair? Is it both? | ||
|
Ryndika
1489 Posts
Should I go 3 spore per mineral line? You can't fit even two for your natural in dash and terminal. | ||
|
Ovid
United Kingdom948 Posts
| ||
|
TimeSpiral
United States1010 Posts
On September 10 2015 02:10 Ovid wrote: Just going to leave this here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lrg-Cs7oOmE&feature=youtu.be Dat control tho ... | ||
|
Tenks
United States3104 Posts
-Buzzfeed SC2 team | ||
| ||
