|
Liberator the Valkyrie with the range in a area that mutalisk could still bomb in spread up and do damage, you want a micro interaction not a hard counter.
One of the reasons I prefer to have the Viking/Thor combination deal with Mutas (in larger numbers) is because I actually kinda enjoyed the mech meta in early 2014 (I think it was arond that time). Korean terans woldn't go ravens but just Vikings + thor + tanks/hellion vs Swarm host/Mutas.
Watching Vikings try to battle Mutalisks and Mutalisks turning around to kill the Vikings (because they outnumbered them), and then Vikings kiting back to their Thors to assist the Vikings --> Simply but great micro.
With a splash air unit that can be massed, I think that's less interesting.Sure you can improve the micro interaction by making the splash dodgeable and that's indeed neat.
However, I still think the Thor + Viking vs Muta solution is better as it doesn't feel like just one micro interaction. But rather it's micro + gives us the whole mobile vs immobile gameplay dynamic that we really lack.
@ Dodgeable Splash
I forgot to talk about the Widow Mine, but I really prefered if this unit was balanced around a much slower projectile, so you actually had time to split against it after the missile had gone of. Maybe the role of the Widow Mine could then be focussed as a more mobile splash unit and the speed could be set up to 3.25-3.5.
So imagine that to counter Mutas you could opt to skip the immobile Thor but instead combine Vikings and Widow Mines which both are very mobile (along with a few Cyclones). The disadvantage of this style is that it's nowhere near as reliable as the splash can be dodged but it would be easier to attack and defend vs Mutas at the same time.
|
On July 22 2015 21:27 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +Liberator the Valkyrie with the range in a area that mutalisk could still bomb in spread up and do damage, you want a micro interaction not a hard counter. One of the reasons I prefer to have the Viking/Thor combination deal with Mutas (in larger numbers) is because I actually kinda enjoyed the mech meta in early 2014 (I think it was arond that time). Korean terans woldn't go ravens but just Vikings + thor + tanks/hellion vs Swarm host/Mutas. Watching Vikings try to battle Mutalisks and Mutalisks turning around to kill the Vikings (because they outnumbered them), and then Vikings kiting back to their Thors to assist the Vikings --> It was pretty good. It was definitely some of the simple move-and-shoot micro interactions that the game imo needs more of. However, obviously this mech-style turned out to be somewhat underpowered, and you really needed to mass ravens for mech to be viable. I fear that if you instead make an anti-air splash unit massable + give it utliity vs ground units, that it will create a much less interesting game dynamic. Okay, you can improve the micro interaction by making the splash dodgeable and that's indeed neat. However, I still think the Thor + Viking vs Muta solution is better. And one of the reasons that the Valkyrie could "kinda" work in BW was due to it not having a ground attack, so you couldn't mass them at all. But what happens if a unit like the Viking or Liberator that only functions decently/very good vs ground becomes the default counter to Mutas? I fear that this will create a foundation that makes it harder to get a "sound" dynamic. @ Dodgeable SplashI forgot to talk about the Widow Mine, but I really prefered if this unit was balanced around a much slower projectile, so you actually had time to split against it after the missile had gone of.
I'm slightly confused, a Valkyrie doesn't have a ground attack which is why I suggested they turn the Liberator into it and I think a knife edge battle between mutalisk and valkyries is an interesting interaction.
edit- The change to the widowmine in Lotv was to show which one it is targeting, with quick boxing you can dodge them
|
I'm slightly confused, a Valkyrie doesn't have a ground attack which is why I suggested they turn the Liberator into it and I think a knife edge battle between mutalisk and valkyries is an interesting interaction.
Okay I thought you just meant to give it dodgle AA splash but maintain anti-ground attack. I don't know, I generally like the idea that a unit doesn't have a too specific role either, because then it comes too obvious when you need to get them.
As i see it, the optimal solution is to give a unit 2-3 unique strenghts along with 1-2 obvious disadvantages (relative to other units in the same race).
This way you avoid the issue of too overlapping roles, and you can balance the game around actual options (actual option = no obvious decisions). Imagine the options with my solution:
Option 1 = Thors + Vikings vs Mutas.
Option 2 = Heavy Vikings only. The Vikings can still help on the ground - unlike Valkyries. The disadvantage here is that you will be in a weaker position vs a tech choice.
Option 3 = Mixing in Mines.
Option 4 = Only Thors. That will allow you to deal with mass Mutas easily, but you will be really immobile. That issue can perhaps be circumvented by more Turrets or defensive Widow Mines.
So the type of dynamic I want is that each unit allows you to play a different style that you otherwise wouldn't be capable + has strategic implications for the opponent. Neither style should be dominant + all styles should promote good micro interactions.
|
On July 22 2015 21:47 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +I'm slightly confused, a Valkyrie doesn't have a ground attack which is why I suggested they turn the Liberator into it and I think a knife edge battle between mutalisk and valkyries is an interesting interaction.
Okay I thought you just meant to give it dodgle AA splash but maintain anti-ground attack.
Hell no, I meant make it into a Valkyrie that ATG attack makes the units too rounded.
|
I strongly appeal to all of the theorycrafters that they start playing the game and THEN posting. I've noticed a couple of posts going like: "oh, I didn't even know they can be reactored, I dont play but I think they shouldn't be". How can anyone say that, honestly? You don't play the game and yet you say something should be or shouldn't be in it?
In Hellbat / Liberator push, the thing you have to deal with are hellbats, not Liberators. when hellbats are gone, the push is stopped and they will fall back. I can see a lot of players dying to hellbats while desperately trying to snipe Liberators and losing 5 queens doing so. This is, in my experience, not a correct reaction. That's why I said before that static defence is a big element of stopping the push - both spines and spores can't be targeted by liberators so they act vs hellbats the same as in HotS - actually even better, because in HotS spines could be sniped by banshee, but this time liberators is there in stead of banshee. So when the spines are engaged by hellbats, this is your window to surround the hellbats (I recommend mass speedlings) and deflect the push.
I'm not saying it's easy. Neither is defending bane-roach push as T, or defending proxy oracle as T, or defending mine drops as P. But I believe it's doable. To decide it's not without playing is a terrible terrible mindset, totally not fit for a competitive RTS in my opinion. And saying "pro players lost as well" is not a good argument, because they lost when the build was out for 1 day. In WoL beta, pro players lost to builds I can defend with my left hand now as well. This is why time is very important here and trying to get the unit removed before giving it time is a fatal mistake.
Also a word about "the role" of a liberator. I'm not the best theorycrafter so I won't go into overlapping etc - but from playing experience I feel its role is very different from a siege tank. I use tanks, but Liberator has given me so many other options in the midgame I could never imagined before. Game truly becomes much deeper, more layered for Terran with this new unit. And I'm sure I haven't tested all scenarios. So even if it comes to be that the unit is indeed too strong, I feel something else should be looked at, because Liberator brings something exciting to the Terran play I haven't been able to experience with other Terran units.
|
Game truly becomes much deeper, more layered for Terran with this new unit.
That's because, until now, the game didn't have any real positional units that locked down areas of the map.
|
|
|
On July 22 2015 23:49 _indigo_ wrote:
I strongly appeal to all of the theorycrafters that they start playing the game and THEN posting. I've noticed a couple of posts going like: "oh, I didn't even know they can be reactored, I dont play but I think they shouldn't be". How can anyone say that, honestly? You don't play the game and yet you say something should be or shouldn't be in it?
People posting in balance threads on TL or reddit don't play the game at all, good thing is they are GM lvl theorycrafters.
|
The Liberator's anti air is pathetically weak right now. Magic box mutas can beat Liberators. Corruptors and voidrays also are too good against liberators .It needs a buff to its anti air.
|
On July 23 2015 00:17 Loccstana wrote:
The Liberator's anti air is pathetically weak right now. Magic box mutas can beat Liberators. Corruptors and voidrays also are too good against liberators .It needs a buff to its anti air.
Stop exaggerating. Liberator is already broken as it is and you want to buff it further? lol, that Terran logic.
|
On July 22 2015 23:58 Beastyqt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2015 23:49 _indigo_ wrote:
I strongly appeal to all of the theorycrafters that they start playing the game and THEN posting. I've noticed a couple of posts going like: "oh, I didn't even know they can be reactored, I dont play but I think they shouldn't be". How can anyone say that, honestly? You don't play the game and yet you say something should be or shouldn't be in it?
People posting in balance threads on TL or reddit don't play the game at all, good thing is they are GM lvl theorycrafters.
Yes you didn't generalise at all, 1 person in this thread said he didn't realise they didn't need a reactor and he just said he thinks that's wrong it wasn't him saying this needs to be changed or trying to force on opinion he just stated his opinion.
Super helpful comment in moving this thread in a good direction.
You have Nerchio stating that he things it's not possible to counter earlygame, would be interesting on seeing another high levels players opinion from the Terran side.
|
I think most people will agree the DPS is probably too high. Of course it's single target, of course it's avoidable, but the amount of control they provide feels just too good. IMO the DPS should get a slight nerf and a tech lab requirement seems mandatory.
|
On July 23 2015 00:42 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I think most people will agree the DPS is probably too high. Of course it's single target, of course it's avoidable, but the amount of control they provide feels just too good. IMO the DPS should get a slight nerf and a tech lab requirement seems mandatory.
I'd much rather lower the HP or something like that, because by being reactorable, you can mass them as a viable alternative antiair unit (and maybe not even using ground attack in certain compositions, maybe only 2 of them all). This aspect is exactly why the unit feels so fresh, because it opens up other compositions. Techlab requirement is the same as banshee and honestly, I'd rather have banshee that way, because it's sure hit damage, cloak and becomes faster later on. If you wanna use it for AA, it needs to be reactorable.
|
On July 22 2015 23:58 Beastyqt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2015 23:49 _indigo_ wrote:
I strongly appeal to all of the theorycrafters that they start playing the game and THEN posting. I've noticed a couple of posts going like: "oh, I didn't even know they can be reactored, I dont play but I think they shouldn't be". How can anyone say that, honestly? You don't play the game and yet you say something should be or shouldn't be in it?
People posting in balance threads on TL or reddit don't play the game at all, good thing is they are GM lvl theorycrafters.
Pros at the same level as you said this is OP.
You cant hide this forever and at one point this will get nerfed.
Eveybody saw the redbull torunament... cmon we arent that dumb you won 6 times in a row with the same strategy.
|
On July 23 2015 01:00 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2015 23:58 Beastyqt wrote:On July 22 2015 23:49 _indigo_ wrote:
I strongly appeal to all of the theorycrafters that they start playing the game and THEN posting. I've noticed a couple of posts going like: "oh, I didn't even know they can be reactored, I dont play but I think they shouldn't be". How can anyone say that, honestly? You don't play the game and yet you say something should be or shouldn't be in it?
People posting in balance threads on TL or reddit don't play the game at all, good thing is they are GM lvl theorycrafters. cmon we arent that dumb you won 6 times in a row with the same strategy.
On day 1 when everybody was rekt by 0 training vs this build. LEGIT REASON TO NURF.
|
It feels like the Liberator requires a ridiculous amount of micro to both use effectively, and to defend against. It feels very much like an Archon Mode unit (maybe that's just because I'm focusing on that mode).
Lib as a harass unit: spores pretty much shut this down hard. Lib can't attack spores and the spore can basically reposition in a similar amount of time as it takes to deactivate AG mode, move, activate AG mode, and then charge the attack. Spore + queen and the Lib is going to do almost nothing.
Obviously if you show up and there is no spore, and only one queen, Libs going to do damage and/or prevent mining for the time it takes to build a spore. But this dynamic is just like being unprepared for anything: mutas, banes, roaches, etc ...
|
On July 23 2015 05:00 TimeSpiral wrote:
It feels like the Liberator requires a ridiculous amount of micro to both use effectively, and to defend against. It feels very much like an Archon Mode unit (maybe that's just because I'm focusing on that mode).
Lib as a harass unit: spores pretty much shut this down hard. Lib can't attack spores and the spore can basically reposition in a similar amount of time as it takes to deactivate AG mode, move, activate AG mode, and then charge the attack. Spore + queen and the Lib is going to do almost nothing.
Obviously if you show up and there is no spore, and only one queen, Libs going to do damage and/or prevent mining for the time it takes to build a spore. But this dynamic is just like being unprepared for anything: mutas, banes, roaches, etc ...
Sorry I'm an arsehole but you don't have a clue.
|
On July 23 2015 00:17 Loccstana wrote:
The Liberator's anti air is pathetically weak right now. Magic box mutas can beat Liberators. Corruptors and voidrays also are too good against liberators .It needs a buff to its anti air.
Lmao build more than 2 liberators then? Honestly Terran lol
|
All you fuckers who don't even bother to read, don't just say "terran lol", because everyone has a different experience (and this was his, not experience of all terrans, which in turn demonises terrans as a whole), and don't talk about "no clue" without argumenting why one's idea is not viable.
So, the responses of some people, who apparently are starting to combat this "OP COMPOSITION" are retarded, have 0 worth and have no connection to reality? Then explain why you think spores + spines + lings to defeat hellbats is not an answer; or why spores + queens don't shut down liberators?
Everyone can say "you have no idea" and disregard the whole post; easiest thing in this life. At least give some credit to someone who bothers to spend a couple of minutes to write down his experience. With this community I hope liberator gets buffed to 7000 dmg per shot and catapults you all into Heartstone forever.
|
On July 22 2015 18:18 Plantarbre wrote:
Just give the liberator a faster attack with the same dps so the queens can heal effectively and you will have a consistent counter.
Like, instead of doing 80 damages, it could deal 35 damages with a faster attack speed (multiplied by 80/35).
Then, hydras will take 3 shots before dying, they will survive longer (also, the liberator will lose some damages as the third shot will waste 25 damages) AND queens will be much efficient against them. The good thing is, the liberator will still be a viable option (against ultras too), and if it's still too strong, then we can consider the numbers are really wrong.
So basically make the liberator as bad as the siege tank? No thanks lol. They already did this to the siege tank years ago due to a bad map pool (steppes of war, scrap station, blistering sands). They made it so tanks do not trade cost efficiently with any unit in the game by ruining the damage it did.
Let's not repeat the same mistake twice please. Unless you want mech to be forced to play 1 hr turtle mech games again.
The great thing about the liberator right now is it can hold a position on the map and allow you to push across the map. Siege tanks should arguably be able to do the same thing but they can't because they received a massive damage nerf in a previous patch years ago.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
