I'm playing random at the moment so I can appreciate how the game is changing with the beta. So far, new units seem okay since last patch, except liberators.
In ZvT, the terran who go liberator will usually go kill drones at distance, forcing the zerg to build air : because of the huge range, ground unit (as hydra) can't always attack them. Then, if the terran keep making liberator, it will reach a "critical" point where even 20 muta or corruptor (even well microed) get killed in 1 or 2 shot by a group of 10 liberator. I tried to make hydra/viper in those game, but always got killed on ground by mech.
On the contrary, when I play TvZ and if I commit to liberator and some mech on ground, I always win... and TvZ was my worst MU..
So IMO * The splash seem to large * The dmg too high for that type of AA * The production is too fast (it shouldn't be reactored at starport) * The range is too much
What do you guy think?
Note that I'm not zerg fanboy, my favorite race is terran.
I've only faced liberators in 2 ways: Lib/hellbat push(1 base and 2 base variants) or with bio/lib.
When I scout lib/hellbat push I just get spores(1 each mineral line and 1-2 at main ramp and nat ramp) and get rw, spores are surprisingly good vs liberators. I follow up with 2 base spire and roach speed+5-6 corruptors.... usually just wins the game. Take 3rd behind it of course and transition.
Vs just having it mixed in with bio. I go hive for faster ultras. Not much to say on this one, haven't faced them this way nearly enough vs competant players.
I guess this post doesn't really add anything to your mass liberator or lib/mech discussion though. My bad <3.
Personally, I would had love the Liberator to be moved to Tec-Lab + Armory Requirement, with their supply cost increasing to 4, cost increasing to 200/200, with some buffs, like health buff, bonus light damage for air (since they are more designed to counter Mass Muta & Phoenix) and maybe an additional armor.
Then maybe, they could move Raven to Reactor so Terran has additional for a more easier access to a supper unit (assuming the Raven's abilities are adjusted well).
On competent hands I feel it is a little much powerful on TvZ, but a lot because of the maps and choke points. It one shot kills Hydras LOL
I think the Reactored feature is OK, think it costs 150 Gas, it is not a joke bro... it is like producing 4 Vikings from 1 Starport at the same time, you really need the income to kick it without All Innin or forgetting your other units...
They could maybe adjust the damage against ground, but TBH I see it pretty decent overall on the Air vs Air engages, and it is not bulky, so on costs and supply I see it OK, not sure about the Siege Mode...
I think they make going Mutalisks completely pointless, but if you have good Ravenger micro, you can usually kill the liberators / push them away from what I have experienced.
I've only really played against liberator + bio mine which crushes lair mass muta style. I found if u add a few corruptor and rush hive u can defend though. Not sure about mech. Idk they are definately wayyy stronger than thors but zerg hive tech is buffed as well.
On a side note i think all the helbat liberator rush builds are pretty holdable
I think right now the Liberator is too good at anti-ground and not good enough at its intended purpose -- countering Mutalisks. Throw in the fact that an armory gives you Hellbats AND AG weapons for the Liberator and things start to get silly.
The ravager has a lot of potentials to explore. You can use them to shoot liberators down since it must be sieged in anti-ground mode.
On July 21 2015 11:16 Clear World wrote: Personally, I would had love the Liberator to be moved to Tec-Lab + Armory Requirement, with their supply cost increasing to 4, cost increasing to 200/200, with some buffs, like health buff, bonus light damage for air (since they are more designed to counter Mass Muta & Phoenix) and maybe an additional armor.
Then maybe, they could move Raven to Reactor so Terran has additional for a more easier access to a supper unit (assuming the Raven's abilities are adjusted well).
No gas-intensive unit is designed to be mass produced, especially a spellcaster.
Liberator is what the siege tank should be - allow you to leapfrog a push across the map. Tanks unfortunately don't do enough damage because they were nerfed shortly after wings of liberty was released and no one knew how to play the game at that time and thought mech was imba.
That's why most WOL/HOTS games are frustrating turtle mech games (for the person playing it and the opponent) because tanks suck in low numbers and you can NEVER move out on the map with them.
Liberators are great in low numbers you can really feel the impact of the unit because it does damage like the old siege tank used to. It really is zone control, your enemy can't just walk into an area with a liberator and be like "haha i don't care." Because they will lose a ton of units.
That is what the siege tank was SUPPOSED to be doing this entire time, making someone scared to a-move into a tank line or anywhere in range unless they were going to commit to the engagement and trade.
Liberator already has huge weaknesses/counters even more so than the siege tank. If you mis-position it and don't target it in a smart manner or cover it with other units, it dies in like 4 shots to things like hydras or stalkers lol.
I started playing the beta again and really am enjoying TvZ / TvT solely because of this unit adding so much to positional play.
With all the above being said, from my perspective of someone that has played 1000's of boring turtle mech games because the gameplay design of SC2 forced me to sit in my base till i had 20 ravens and 20 tanks etc...it feels really fun to be able to be out on the map with liberators and mech units doing a slow leap frog push brood war style and be able to trade against my opponent's units.
why do i not read infestor a single time in this thread? area damage is always the answer to mass air styles. fungle and maybe some vipers to pull out liberators to kill them with hydras.
or just move around them like everybody does with broodlords
Well, siege tanks can be added in bio play now, as they can be carried by medivacs in siege mode. You don't need to have them in large number. Just a few in strategic positions could scare the enemies off.
Everyone knows this is OP as hell at armory you get the AG mode + hellbats before the other guy got spire, 15 range that 1 shots hydras + fire power on the ground.
Its very dumb... dont know how this got in th beta, this and the invulnerable part of disruptor. Stupid design its stupid.
On July 21 2015 19:22 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: Everyone knows this is OP as hell at armory you get the AG mode + hellbats before the other guy got spire, 15 range that 1 shots hydras + fire power on the ground.
Its very dumb... dont know how this got in th beta, this and the invulnerable part of disruptor. Stupid design its stupid.
What's your opinion on 8 armor ultras and parasitic bomb rendering air tech useless vs zerg? This is ok i guess?
I have not seen enough games between high level players where liberators are used to comment on the balance. All I can say is that I really enjoy watching those games. Finally, FINALLY terran can properly control a patch of ground and slow-push across the map. This is what I was waiting for for 5 years. However, in my perfect world the tank would be able to do its job and the liberator would not exist. Sadly, blizzard hates the tank with a passion. I'm sure they would give it cloak before buffing its damage in any way.
On July 21 2015 14:48 graNite wrote: why do i not read infestor a single time in this thread? area damage is always the answer to mass air styles. fungle and maybe some vipers to pull out liberators to kill them with hydras.
or just move around them like everybody does with broodlords
Problem is that as soon as they see Infestor they will never clump them intentionally again and because the size of the unit it would be hard to catch more than 3 with a fungal not to mention the damage is negligible because of the huge health pool.
I think the issue with the unit is that both it's AA and ATG mode are very strong. The AA mode isn't too strong in low numbers but when massed it's practically impossible even with very good splits to kill them all. ATG mode doesn't need too much explaining for it's insane strength 85 damage a shot and a faster cooldown than the siege tank. Pretty much the only way I've managed to deal with them is taking engagements on creep with spores/queen/hydra but they can abuse high ground/empty space. Baring that you just need to counter attack which is my preferred method since mass liberator can't actually deal with buildings.
Being accessible without tech lab is the biggest problem I think. Liberators are indeed good vs ground and weak vs air at low numbers and it should be impractical to get a huge fleet of Liberators (once the T has enough of them it's very hard to deal with their AA weapon) with proper ground support.
I agree the AG could be toned down a bit too. The biggest problem with mech units currently is the cyclone honestly, not necessarily because it's too strong, but because it's dull, too all-around and downright uninteresting.
On July 21 2015 19:22 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: Everyone knows this is OP as hell at armory you get the AG mode + hellbats before the other guy got spire, 15 range that 1 shots hydras + fire power on the ground.
Its very dumb... dont know how this got in th beta, this and the invulnerable part of disruptor. Stupid design its stupid.
What's your opinion on 8 armor ultras and parasitic bomb rendering air tech useless vs zerg? This is ok i guess?
Ghosts new snipe can be used vs Ultralisk and Cyclone/Liberator is very good vs Ultralisk. PB is late game and only works if you really mass air alot. Are you telling me that Zerg should have no answer to mass air at all ?
On July 21 2015 19:41 dust7 wrote: I have not seen enough games between high level players where liberators are used to comment on the balance. All I can say is that I really enjoy watching those games. Finally, FINALLY terran can properly control a patch of ground and slow-push across the map. This is what I was waiting for for 5 years. However, in my perfect world the tank would be able to do its job and the liberator would not exist. Sadly, blizzard hates the tank with a passion. I'm sure they would give it cloak before buffing its damage in any way.
qxc winning redbull torunament without any loss with them... 6 times in a row.
im soory but this is just ignorance or just wanting this to be in the game for free wins.
On July 21 2015 20:32 Salteador Neo wrote: ^ The Liberator was actually designed to be viable as a massable air unit. Blizz words.
The fact that this thing and the cyclone both overshadow the already unused (and iconic) siege tank is sad IMO.
Im okay with that as long as i get to PB and Hive and not just die without any answer to them... Corruptor and mutalisk cant win vs 20 liberators just as they cant against 10 or more carriers.
This is why they made PB. Its a band aid for zerg lack of AA vs mass air.
On July 21 2015 20:32 Salteador Neo wrote: ^ The Liberator was actually designed to be viable as a massable air unit. Blizz words.
The fact that this thing and the cyclone both overshadow the already unused (and iconic) siege tank is sad IMO.
Yeah. Massable all-around units. Not in the spirit of mech in the slightest. Styles should have weaknesses you have to get around, and air vulnerability was one of the most well-done aspects of mech. I'm quite convinced mech should be made viable with a stronger and more versatile ground army that would help make siege tank play strong, rather than give strong anti-air tools and say "see, mech is viable now". Mass cyclones is not mech just like mass thors is not mech. It's a deathball made from factories with tech labs.
Anyone tried something like ling/bling/corruptor into Broodlord/Viper against bio/liberator yet? Sounds like the way to go (but it's pure theorycraft; haven't tried myself)
I agree about the Tank and Libs, but people, Tank does SPLASH damage when Sieged... Libs only SINGLE TARGET damage.
That is a huge difference to start of... also Libs will be nerfed for sure. The problem with Tank is that it can be easily overwhelmed by ground quick units that run at it usually, while Libs ignore that issue being flying... specially on early stages of the game. But I Agreee that Siege Tanks are a lot more "micreable" now thanks to the Medivac (and I still do't like the drop on Siege mode, I want a pikup on Siege but drop standard)
I think Blizz should have used the "bonus vs Shield" on Tanks instead Widow Mines in hots, and they didn't...
On July 21 2015 20:36 [PkF] Wire wrote: Mass cyclones is not mech just like mass thors is not mech. It's a deathball made from factories with tech labs.
I completely agree. Cruising around on the map with a cyclone/hellion army feels like playing protoss. Anything that does not involve the siege tank as its core unit is not mech. I fear with the introduction of the liberator Blizzard has robbed themself of any opportunity to let the tank do its job, that is provide space control you cannot just amove into. Cause whos gonna break a line of liberators and buffed tanks?
On July 21 2015 20:49 Sogetsu wrote: I agree about the Tank and Libs, but people, Tank does SPLASH damage when Sieged... Libs only SINGLE TARGET damage.
That is a huge difference to start of.
Sure, but the main point here is that liberators, even in small numbers, provide space control, something the tank should be able to do but utterly fails at. A few well set up libs will prevent an opponent from engaging a certain position while a few well set up tanks will just get roflstomped because they do no damage and roll over and die when looked at funny. Oh, and they do all that for 3 supply, while the liberator costs 2.
I would like to test the following changes to mech:
Swap supply of liberator and tank. Increase siege and unsiege time of the liberator. It is about space control, so you should get punished for controlling the wrong space. Give tank back its old damage. Tanks picked up by medivacs get dropped unsieged. Swap health of cyclone and tank. Nerf the cyclone ground attack by changing it to something ok-ish similar to the viking ground attack. Give cyclone AA at armory tech. Remove bio tag from hellbats.
Now you have mech centered around a strong tank with helpful utility units that help your composition but should not be massed unless in certain situations.
On July 21 2015 20:47 Big J wrote: Anyone tried something like ling/bling/corruptor into Broodlord/Viper against bio/liberator yet? Sounds like the way to go (but it's pure theorycraft; haven't tried myself)
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
On July 21 2015 20:49 Sogetsu wrote: I agree about the Tank and Libs, but people, Tank does SPLASH damage when Sieged... Libs only SINGLE TARGET damage.
That is a huge difference to start of... also Libs will be nerfed for sure. The problem with Tank is that it can be easily overwhelmed by ground quick units that run at it usually, while Libs ignore that issue being flying... specially on early stages of the game. But I Agreee that Siege Tanks are a lot more "micreable" now thanks to the Medivac (and I still do't like the drop on Siege mode, I want a pikup on Siege but drop standard)
I think Blizz should have used the "bonus vs Shield" on Tanks instead Widow Mines in hots, and they didn't...
Splash is the only pro for tanks, everything else is cons.
Libs alone kill stuff and then get away because they fly. Tanks alone hurt a bit of stuff and then die.
Libs in anti-air mode counter mutas and phoenixes. Poor Tanks can't hit air period.
On July 21 2015 20:47 Big J wrote: Anyone tried something like ling/bling/corruptor into Broodlord/Viper against bio/liberator yet? Sounds like the way to go (but it's pure theorycraft; haven't tried myself)
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
You are essentially right, although the tone of your post is unnecessary. The reason 2 base muta works in hots is because you take the economic hit to get the mutas out and then apply pressure while taking a third behind it. The reason it doesn't work in lotv is because you can't apply any pressure since the liberators are being produced 2 at a time and easily shut down the usual 8-10 mutas you would get, then you just die to the 3 base push.
I tried corrupters they suck too, you can defend the liberator "rushes" with 2 base spire but since you can't apply any pressure with the spire units so the terran is free to expand and then just use the edge they have to kill you with a push. I have killed high level terrans playing liberators with 2 base spire but its more because they fucked up and lost like 4 liberators for free.
On July 21 2015 20:47 Big J wrote: Anyone tried something like ling/bling/corruptor into Broodlord/Viper against bio/liberator yet? Sounds like the way to go (but it's pure theorycraft; haven't tried myself)
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
On July 21 2015 20:47 Big J wrote: Anyone tried something like ling/bling/corruptor into Broodlord/Viper against bio/liberator yet? Sounds like the way to go (but it's pure theorycraft; haven't tried myself)
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
You are essentially right, although the tone of your post is unnecessary. The reason 2 base muta works in hots is because you take the economic hit to get the mutas out and then apply pressure while taking a third behind it. The reason it doesn't work in lotv is because you can't apply any pressure since the liberators are being produced 2 at a time and easily shut down the usual 8-10 mutas you would get, then you just die to the 3 base push.
I tried corrupters they suck too, you can defend the liberator "rushes" with 2 base spire but since you can't apply any pressure with the spire units the terran is free to expand and then just use the edge they have to kill you with a push. I have killed high level terrans playing liberators with 2 base spire but its more because they fucked up and lost like 4 liberators for free.
Im sorry for my tone but some of this people here have no idea of what they talk. Many of them dont even play LotV and come with some strange ideas just to make and argument and let their main race have some Imba strat.
Im my view all races have at this point an imba start but the most obivous ones are.
overlord drop ( mainly powerfull vs protoss ) 4 gate adepts and 2 other early adept all ins liberator + hellbat push mass cyclone + hellions flying tanks ( their working on a nerf accoring to david kim )
Overall Terran mech is very imba and it annoys me that blizzard is buffing it instead of seeing the real problems... like making the siege tank into a harass tool instad of being a siege unit like it was in BW
Its such a bad joke with some of the new units... their design is really bad.
On July 21 2015 20:47 Big J wrote: Anyone tried something like ling/bling/corruptor into Broodlord/Viper against bio/liberator yet? Sounds like the way to go (but it's pure theorycraft; haven't tried myself)
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
Try roaches and ravagers, kkkk
Ravagers dont work, the ability is to slow, and has only 8-9 range, he can dodge with 2 liberators all day since they buffed the time of switch from AA to ground mode. They broke the Liberator its way to OP
On July 21 2015 20:47 Big J wrote: Anyone tried something like ling/bling/corruptor into Broodlord/Viper against bio/liberator yet? Sounds like the way to go (but it's pure theorycraft; haven't tried myself)
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
Try roaches and ravagers, kkkk
Ravagers dont work, the ability is to slow, and has only 8-9 range, he can dodge with 2 liberators all day since they buffed the time of switch from AA to ground mode. They broke the Liberator its way to OP
Two Master/GM players have now told you that they currently defend early liberators with ravagers. If you don't believe it, I can't help you. You better bring out some replays how ravager defense fails then.
On July 21 2015 12:06 GGzerG wrote: I think they make going Mutalisks completely pointless, but if you have good Ravenger micro, you can usually kill the liberators / push them away from what I have experienced.
On July 21 2015 20:47 Big J wrote: Anyone tried something like ling/bling/corruptor into Broodlord/Viper against bio/liberator yet? Sounds like the way to go (but it's pure theorycraft; haven't tried myself)
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
Try roaches and ravagers, kkkk
Ravagers dont work, the ability is to slow, and has only 8-9 range, he can dodge with 2 liberators all day since they buffed the time of switch from AA to ground mode. They broke the Liberator its way to OP
Two Master/GM players have now told you that they currently defend early liberators with ravagers. If you don't believe it, I can't help you. You better bring out some replays how ravager defense fails then.
On July 21 2015 12:06 GGzerG wrote: I think they make going Mutalisks completely pointless, but if you have good Ravenger micro, you can usually kill the liberators / push them away from what I have experienced.
So you can actually defend with a unit that costs 200 Resources early on? That sounds amazing, i bet you are ahead after going fast Ravager, right?
On July 21 2015 20:47 Big J wrote: Anyone tried something like ling/bling/corruptor into Broodlord/Viper against bio/liberator yet? Sounds like the way to go (but it's pure theorycraft; haven't tried myself)
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
Try roaches and ravagers, kkkk
Ravagers dont work, the ability is to slow, and has only 8-9 range, he can dodge with 2 liberators all day since they buffed the time of switch from AA to ground mode. They broke the Liberator its way to OP
Two Master/GM players have now told you that they currently defend early liberators with ravagers. If you don't believe it, I can't help you. You better bring out some replays how ravager defense fails then.
On July 21 2015 12:06 GGzerG wrote: I think they make going Mutalisks completely pointless, but if you have good Ravenger micro, you can usually kill the liberators / push them away from what I have experienced.
So you can actually defend with a unit that costs 200 Resources early on? That sounds amazing, i bet you are ahead after going fast Ravager, right?
Remember you are defending a unit that costs 300 resources. I've been wondering about going for a heavier queen style (4-6 queens) has anyone tried that?
On July 21 2015 20:47 Big J wrote: Anyone tried something like ling/bling/corruptor into Broodlord/Viper against bio/liberator yet? Sounds like the way to go (but it's pure theorycraft; haven't tried myself)
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
Try roaches and ravagers, kkkk
Ravagers dont work, the ability is to slow, and has only 8-9 range, he can dodge with 2 liberators all day since they buffed the time of switch from AA to ground mode. They broke the Liberator its way to OP
Two Master/GM players have now told you that they currently defend early liberators with ravagers. If you don't believe it, I can't help you. You better bring out some replays how ravager defense fails then.
On July 21 2015 12:06 GGzerG wrote: I think they make going Mutalisks completely pointless, but if you have good Ravenger micro, you can usually kill the liberators / push them away from what I have experienced.
So you can actually defend with a unit that costs 200 Resources early on? That sounds amazing, i bet you are ahead after going fast Ravager, right?
Remember you are defending a unit that costs 300 resources. I've been wondering about going for a heavier queen style (4-6 queens) has anyone tried that?
On July 21 2015 20:47 Big J wrote: Anyone tried something like ling/bling/corruptor into Broodlord/Viper against bio/liberator yet? Sounds like the way to go (but it's pure theorycraft; haven't tried myself)
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
Try roaches and ravagers, kkkk
Ravagers dont work, the ability is to slow, and has only 8-9 range, he can dodge with 2 liberators all day since they buffed the time of switch from AA to ground mode. They broke the Liberator its way to OP
Two Master/GM players have now told you that they currently defend early liberators with ravagers. If you don't believe it, I can't help you. You better bring out some replays how ravager defense fails then.
On July 21 2015 12:06 GGzerG wrote: I think they make going Mutalisks completely pointless, but if you have good Ravenger micro, you can usually kill the liberators / push them away from what I have experienced.
So you can actually defend with a unit that costs 200 Resources early on? That sounds amazing, i bet you are ahead after going fast Ravager, right?
Remember you are defending a unit that costs 300 resources. I've been wondering about going for a heavier queen style (4-6 queens) has anyone tried that?
No you dont defend 300 resources. You die. You wont go ravager and defend against hellbats as well.
On July 21 2015 20:47 Big J wrote: Anyone tried something like ling/bling/corruptor into Broodlord/Viper against bio/liberator yet? Sounds like the way to go (but it's pure theorycraft; haven't tried myself)
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
Try roaches and ravagers, kkkk
Ravagers dont work, the ability is to slow, and has only 8-9 range, he can dodge with 2 liberators all day since they buffed the time of switch from AA to ground mode. They broke the Liberator its way to OP
Two Master/GM players have now told you that they currently defend early liberators with ravagers. If you don't believe it, I can't help you. You better bring out some replays how ravager defense fails then.
On July 21 2015 12:06 GGzerG wrote: I think they make going Mutalisks completely pointless, but if you have good Ravenger micro, you can usually kill the liberators / push them away from what I have experienced.
So you can actually defend with a unit that costs 200 Resources early on? That sounds amazing, i bet you are ahead after going fast Ravager, right?
Remember you are defending a unit that costs 300 resources. I've been wondering about going for a heavier queen style (4-6 queens) has anyone tried that?
They rape queens
If they get to the ATG mode in a good position, Queens are 2 shotted not one shot and I think you'd have 2 transfuses when it hits with a 4-6 queen style. I think (going off numbers haven't tried the style wanted to know if anyone else has) that 5/6 queens has enough DPS to kill a liberator before it manages to get to ATG.
I've not tried Ravager, how effective is it and what's the composition afterwards?
On July 21 2015 20:47 Big J wrote: Anyone tried something like ling/bling/corruptor into Broodlord/Viper against bio/liberator yet? Sounds like the way to go (but it's pure theorycraft; haven't tried myself)
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
Try roaches and ravagers, kkkk
Ravagers dont work, the ability is to slow, and has only 8-9 range, he can dodge with 2 liberators all day since they buffed the time of switch from AA to ground mode. They broke the Liberator its way to OP
Two Master/GM players have now told you that they currently defend early liberators with ravagers. If you don't believe it, I can't help you. You better bring out some replays how ravager defense fails then.
On July 21 2015 12:06 GGzerG wrote: I think they make going Mutalisks completely pointless, but if you have good Ravenger micro, you can usually kill the liberators / push them away from what I have experienced.
So you can actually defend with a unit that costs 200 Resources early on? That sounds amazing, i bet you are ahead after going fast Ravager, right?
Remember you are defending a unit that costs 300 resources. I've been wondering about going for a heavier queen style (4-6 queens) has anyone tried that?
They rape queens
If they get to the ATG mode in a good position, Queens are 2 shotted not one shot and I think you'd have 2 transfuses when it hits with a 4-6 queen style. I think (going off numbers haven't tried the style wanted to know if anyone else has) that 5/6 queens has enough DPS to kill a liberator before it manages to get to ATG.
I've not tried Ravager, how effective is it and what's the composition afterwards?
Its 15 range and if he postions between the space of your 2 and 3 you wont have creep, you will move slow and he will kill your queens.
Do you even play LotV, cuz i see you throwing some ideas that are so..... lets say impractical ? Have you even watched the red bull torunament where qxc won 6 times in a row with liberators.... one match where 6 queens where sniped by 1 liberator before even getting to hit it and he used transfuse to.
At least try using that in LotV and then post... cuz man its so dumb.
The only way its 2 base muta but you died to a bio push after that. Basically the Terran has to be really bad at the game or you must be in plat or something to work.
On July 21 2015 20:47 Big J wrote: Anyone tried something like ling/bling/corruptor into Broodlord/Viper against bio/liberator yet? Sounds like the way to go (but it's pure theorycraft; haven't tried myself)
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
Try roaches and ravagers, kkkk
Ravagers dont work, the ability is to slow, and has only 8-9 range, he can dodge with 2 liberators all day since they buffed the time of switch from AA to ground mode. They broke the Liberator its way to OP
Two Master/GM players have now told you that they currently defend early liberators with ravagers. If you don't believe it, I can't help you. You better bring out some replays how ravager defense fails then.
On July 21 2015 12:06 GGzerG wrote: I think they make going Mutalisks completely pointless, but if you have good Ravenger micro, you can usually kill the liberators / push them away from what I have experienced.
And im telling you, it doesnt work, go try it out and see it.
On July 21 2015 20:47 Big J wrote: Anyone tried something like ling/bling/corruptor into Broodlord/Viper against bio/liberator yet? Sounds like the way to go (but it's pure theorycraft; haven't tried myself)
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
Try roaches and ravagers, kkkk
Ravagers dont work, the ability is to slow, and has only 8-9 range, he can dodge with 2 liberators all day since they buffed the time of switch from AA to ground mode. They broke the Liberator its way to OP
Two Master/GM players have now told you that they currently defend early liberators with ravagers. If you don't believe it, I can't help you. You better bring out some replays how ravager defense fails then.
On July 21 2015 12:06 GGzerG wrote: I think they make going Mutalisks completely pointless, but if you have good Ravenger micro, you can usually kill the liberators / push them away from what I have experienced.
So you can actually defend with a unit that costs 200 Resources early on? That sounds amazing, i bet you are ahead after going fast Ravager, right?
Remember you are defending a unit that costs 300 resources. I've been wondering about going for a heavier queen style (4-6 queens) has anyone tried that?
They rape queens
If they get to the ATG mode in a good position, Queens are 2 shotted not one shot and I think you'd have 2 transfuses when it hits with a 4-6 queen style. I think (going off numbers haven't tried the style wanted to know if anyone else has) that 5/6 queens has enough DPS to kill a liberator before it manages to get to ATG.
I've not tried Ravager, how effective is it and what's the composition afterwards?
its 15 range and if he postions between the space of your 2 and 3 you wont have creep, you will move slow and he will kill your queens.
Do you even play LotV, cuz i see you thraw some ideas that are so lets say impractical ? Have you even watched the red bull torunament where 6 queens where sniped by 1 liberator before even getting to hit it and he used transfuse to.
At least try using that in LotV and then post... cuz man its so dumb.
If you're going for a 4-6 queen style you will easily have creep between your natural and third base. Slightly rich about throwing impractical ideas around, as I said I've not tried going 4-6 queens and was wondering if anyone had tried the style and how it fared, I'm not asserting that it's the best style or even good vs this just asking. Can you link me to the tournament where someone went 6 queens and lost them all to 1 liberator.
it seems very strong, I will tell you that much, and should probably be adjusted a little. But a lot of things do, like as a zerg player I am willing to admit that the current nydus is a bit bullshit.
On July 21 2015 20:57 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: [quote]
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
Try roaches and ravagers, kkkk
Ravagers dont work, the ability is to slow, and has only 8-9 range, he can dodge with 2 liberators all day since they buffed the time of switch from AA to ground mode. They broke the Liberator its way to OP
Two Master/GM players have now told you that they currently defend early liberators with ravagers. If you don't believe it, I can't help you. You better bring out some replays how ravager defense fails then.
On July 21 2015 12:06 GGzerG wrote: I think they make going Mutalisks completely pointless, but if you have good Ravenger micro, you can usually kill the liberators / push them away from what I have experienced.
So you can actually defend with a unit that costs 200 Resources early on? That sounds amazing, i bet you are ahead after going fast Ravager, right?
Remember you are defending a unit that costs 300 resources. I've been wondering about going for a heavier queen style (4-6 queens) has anyone tried that?
They rape queens
If they get to the ATG mode in a good position, Queens are 2 shotted not one shot and I think you'd have 2 transfuses when it hits with a 4-6 queen style. I think (going off numbers haven't tried the style wanted to know if anyone else has) that 5/6 queens has enough DPS to kill a liberator before it manages to get to ATG.
I've not tried Ravager, how effective is it and what's the composition afterwards?
its 15 range and if he postions between the space of your 2 and 3 you wont have creep, you will move slow and he will kill your queens.
Do you even play LotV, cuz i see you thraw some ideas that are so lets say impractical ? Have you even watched the red bull torunament where 6 queens where sniped by 1 liberator before even getting to hit it and he used transfuse to.
At least try using that in LotV and then post... cuz man its so dumb.
If you're going for a 4-6 queen style you will easily have creep between your natural and third base. Slightly rich about throwing impractical ideas around, as I said I've not tried going 4-6 queens and was wondering if anyone had tried the style and how it fared, I'm not asserting that it's the best style or even good vs this just asking. Can you link me to the tournament where someone went 6 queens and lost them all to 1 liberator.
Watch the vods where qxc + beastyqt plays they are mostly going for the liberator + hellbat push. And nope you dont have creep toward you 3 when liberator + hellbat comes.
It comes at the 5 min.
My replys can be a bit assholish but im so tired of people defending IMBA stuff and mostly telling me to go ravager vs this when they even dont know if it works.
Best example of Liberator OP is here.
NOTE: Im not saying that Medivac/Tank is OP cuz David Kim noticed that and said that they want a change, they will also change the Cyclone soon with lock-on breaking without vision and only 7 range lock-on.... other tweaks to.
But im hoping they wont make Mech IMBA cuz for now there is no reason to go bio.
Ravagers dont work, the ability is to slow, and has only 8-9 range, he can dodge with 2 liberators all day since they buffed the time of switch from AA to ground mode. They broke the Liberator its way to OP
Two Master/GM players have now told you that they currently defend early liberators with ravagers. If you don't believe it, I can't help you. You better bring out some replays how ravager defense fails then.
On July 21 2015 12:06 GGzerG wrote: I think they make going Mutalisks completely pointless, but if you have good Ravenger micro, you can usually kill the liberators / push them away from what I have experienced.
So you can actually defend with a unit that costs 200 Resources early on? That sounds amazing, i bet you are ahead after going fast Ravager, right?
Remember you are defending a unit that costs 300 resources. I've been wondering about going for a heavier queen style (4-6 queens) has anyone tried that?
They rape queens
If they get to the ATG mode in a good position, Queens are 2 shotted not one shot and I think you'd have 2 transfuses when it hits with a 4-6 queen style. I think (going off numbers haven't tried the style wanted to know if anyone else has) that 5/6 queens has enough DPS to kill a liberator before it manages to get to ATG.
I've not tried Ravager, how effective is it and what's the composition afterwards?
its 15 range and if he postions between the space of your 2 and 3 you wont have creep, you will move slow and he will kill your queens.
Do you even play LotV, cuz i see you thraw some ideas that are so lets say impractical ? Have you even watched the red bull torunament where 6 queens where sniped by 1 liberator before even getting to hit it and he used transfuse to.
At least try using that in LotV and then post... cuz man its so dumb.
If you're going for a 4-6 queen style you will easily have creep between your natural and third base. Slightly rich about throwing impractical ideas around, as I said I've not tried going 4-6 queens and was wondering if anyone had tried the style and how it fared, I'm not asserting that it's the best style or even good vs this just asking. Can you link me to the tournament where someone went 6 queens and lost them all to 1 liberator.
Watch the vods where qxc + beastyqt plays they are mostly going for the liberator + hellbat push. And nope you dont have creep toward you 3 when liberator + hellbat comes.
It comes at the 5 min.
My replys can be a bit assholish but im so tired of people defending IMBA stuff and mostly telling me to go ravager vs this when they even dont know if it works.
I'm not defending it, I think it's total BS I was just asking whether a heavy queen style has been tried. What time is the game in the 5hr vod?
edit - I watched the replay at 1:30 he had no creep spread because he hadn't gone for the style I was suggesting he could also have 2 more queens at the time it hits, if he has creep he can zone the liberator out before it gets into that position.
On July 21 2015 21:30 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: [quote]
Ravagers dont work, the ability is to slow, and has only 8-9 range, he can dodge with 2 liberators all day since they buffed the time of switch from AA to ground mode. They broke the Liberator its way to OP
Two Master/GM players have now told you that they currently defend early liberators with ravagers. If you don't believe it, I can't help you. You better bring out some replays how ravager defense fails then.
On July 21 2015 12:06 GGzerG wrote: I think they make going Mutalisks completely pointless, but if you have good Ravenger micro, you can usually kill the liberators / push them away from what I have experienced.
So you can actually defend with a unit that costs 200 Resources early on? That sounds amazing, i bet you are ahead after going fast Ravager, right?
Remember you are defending a unit that costs 300 resources. I've been wondering about going for a heavier queen style (4-6 queens) has anyone tried that?
They rape queens
If they get to the ATG mode in a good position, Queens are 2 shotted not one shot and I think you'd have 2 transfuses when it hits with a 4-6 queen style. I think (going off numbers haven't tried the style wanted to know if anyone else has) that 5/6 queens has enough DPS to kill a liberator before it manages to get to ATG.
I've not tried Ravager, how effective is it and what's the composition afterwards?
its 15 range and if he postions between the space of your 2 and 3 you wont have creep, you will move slow and he will kill your queens.
Do you even play LotV, cuz i see you thraw some ideas that are so lets say impractical ? Have you even watched the red bull torunament where 6 queens where sniped by 1 liberator before even getting to hit it and he used transfuse to.
At least try using that in LotV and then post... cuz man its so dumb.
If you're going for a 4-6 queen style you will easily have creep between your natural and third base. Slightly rich about throwing impractical ideas around, as I said I've not tried going 4-6 queens and was wondering if anyone had tried the style and how it fared, I'm not asserting that it's the best style or even good vs this just asking. Can you link me to the tournament where someone went 6 queens and lost them all to 1 liberator.
Watch the vods where qxc + beastyqt plays they are mostly going for the liberator + hellbat push. And nope you dont have creep toward you 3 when liberator + hellbat comes.
It comes at the 5 min.
My replys can be a bit assholish but im so tired of people defending IMBA stuff and mostly telling me to go ravager vs this when they even dont know if it works.
On July 21 2015 21:30 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: [quote]
Ravagers dont work, the ability is to slow, and has only 8-9 range, he can dodge with 2 liberators all day since they buffed the time of switch from AA to ground mode. They broke the Liberator its way to OP
Two Master/GM players have now told you that they currently defend early liberators with ravagers. If you don't believe it, I can't help you. You better bring out some replays how ravager defense fails then.
On July 21 2015 12:06 GGzerG wrote: I think they make going Mutalisks completely pointless, but if you have good Ravenger micro, you can usually kill the liberators / push them away from what I have experienced.
So you can actually defend with a unit that costs 200 Resources early on? That sounds amazing, i bet you are ahead after going fast Ravager, right?
Remember you are defending a unit that costs 300 resources. I've been wondering about going for a heavier queen style (4-6 queens) has anyone tried that?
They rape queens
If they get to the ATG mode in a good position, Queens are 2 shotted not one shot and I think you'd have 2 transfuses when it hits with a 4-6 queen style. I think (going off numbers haven't tried the style wanted to know if anyone else has) that 5/6 queens has enough DPS to kill a liberator before it manages to get to ATG.
I've not tried Ravager, how effective is it and what's the composition afterwards?
its 15 range and if he postions between the space of your 2 and 3 you wont have creep, you will move slow and he will kill your queens.
Do you even play LotV, cuz i see you thraw some ideas that are so lets say impractical ? Have you even watched the red bull torunament where 6 queens where sniped by 1 liberator before even getting to hit it and he used transfuse to.
At least try using that in LotV and then post... cuz man its so dumb.
If you're going for a 4-6 queen style you will easily have creep between your natural and third base. Slightly rich about throwing impractical ideas around, as I said I've not tried going 4-6 queens and was wondering if anyone had tried the style and how it fared, I'm not asserting that it's the best style or even good vs this just asking. Can you link me to the tournament where someone went 6 queens and lost them all to 1 liberator.
Watch the vods where qxc + beastyqt plays they are mostly going for the liberator + hellbat push. And nope you dont have creep toward you 3 when liberator + hellbat comes.
It comes at the 5 min.
My replys can be a bit assholish but im so tired of people defending IMBA stuff and mostly telling me to go ravager vs this when they even dont know if it works.
I'm not defending it, I think it's total BS I was just asking whether a heavy queen style has been tried. What time is the game in the 5hr vod?
edit - I watched the replay at 1:30 he had no creep spread because he hadn't gone for the style I was suggesting he could also have 2 more queens at the time it hits, if he has creep he can zone the liberator out before it gets into that position.
Yes it was used and it failed badly, you can see in one of the matches. The 5hr vod is the whole qualifer 3 of the redbull tournament. I dont have the time stamps where qxc plays with the liberators but you can find them in the video.
They style your talking about was used, i found it here 3.02.00
Just wondering how to play T in LOTV without herc, without OP cylcones, without Bio, without OP liberator, without tanks/medivacs, without no-ebay turrets. I thought that was a LOTV beta, not HoTs
Guys, stop playing around, just remove the Terran race already if that's what you're up too. I don't see how terran is supposed to do anything in LOTV if the only thing left untouched is the BC teleportation and some random useless ghost spell.
The liberator IS too strong, just like the tank drops are, but that's all that the terrans have. If you want to nerf them, you gotta buff other stuff.
Two Master/GM players have now told you that they currently defend early liberators with ravagers. If you don't believe it, I can't help you. You better bring out some replays how ravager defense fails then.
[quote]
So you can actually defend with a unit that costs 200 Resources early on? That sounds amazing, i bet you are ahead after going fast Ravager, right?
Remember you are defending a unit that costs 300 resources. I've been wondering about going for a heavier queen style (4-6 queens) has anyone tried that?
They rape queens
If they get to the ATG mode in a good position, Queens are 2 shotted not one shot and I think you'd have 2 transfuses when it hits with a 4-6 queen style. I think (going off numbers haven't tried the style wanted to know if anyone else has) that 5/6 queens has enough DPS to kill a liberator before it manages to get to ATG.
I've not tried Ravager, how effective is it and what's the composition afterwards?
its 15 range and if he postions between the space of your 2 and 3 you wont have creep, you will move slow and he will kill your queens.
Do you even play LotV, cuz i see you thraw some ideas that are so lets say impractical ? Have you even watched the red bull torunament where 6 queens where sniped by 1 liberator before even getting to hit it and he used transfuse to.
At least try using that in LotV and then post... cuz man its so dumb.
If you're going for a 4-6 queen style you will easily have creep between your natural and third base. Slightly rich about throwing impractical ideas around, as I said I've not tried going 4-6 queens and was wondering if anyone had tried the style and how it fared, I'm not asserting that it's the best style or even good vs this just asking. Can you link me to the tournament where someone went 6 queens and lost them all to 1 liberator.
Watch the vods where qxc + beastyqt plays they are mostly going for the liberator + hellbat push. And nope you dont have creep toward you 3 when liberator + hellbat comes.
It comes at the 5 min.
My replys can be a bit assholish but im so tired of people defending IMBA stuff and mostly telling me to go ravager vs this when they even dont know if it works.
I'm not defending it, I think it's total BS I was just asking whether a heavy queen style has been tried. What time is the game in the 5hr vod?
edit - I watched the replay at 1:30 he had no creep spread because he hadn't gone for the style I was suggesting he could also have 2 more queens at the time it hits, if he has creep he can zone the liberator out before it gets into that position.
Yes it was used and it failed badly, you can see in one of the matches. The 5hr vod is the whole qualifer 3 of the redbull tournament. I dont have the time stamps where qxc plays with the liberators but you can find them in the video.
They style your talking about was used
Just to clarify my comment was about the second video, they didn't go for the style I was talking about and they executed it badly. I found the game I think at 3hr01min they sort of did what I was saying and I think it's a potentially good style but they didn't spread the creep aggressively enough they used one tumour and delayed spreading it after the first lay down on it. Now if that isn't fast enough you could forgo the first natural queens inject and lay a tumour straight away. If you also notice how much damage the queens did when they finally got within range I think having 4/5 queens with creep spread will be enough to zone it out and kill it. Will be trying this style because I think it has potential.
edit - thanks for finding the time must've found it at the sametime.
On July 21 2015 23:23 Plantarbre wrote: Just wondering how to play T in LOTV without herc, without OP cylcones, without Bio, without OP liberator, without tanks/medivacs, without no-ebay turrets. I thought that was a LOTV beta, not HoTs
Guys, stop playing around, just remove the Terran race already if that's what you're up too. I don't see how terran is supposed to do anything in LOTV if the only thing left untouched is the BC teleportation and some random useless ghost spell.
The liberator IS too strong, just like the tank drops are, but that's all that the terrans have. If you want to nerf them, you gotta buff other stuff.
That goes without saying, abusive units as a bandaid for a 50% winratio isn't a good thing. Fixing the abusive units first then minor tweaks can be made.
I agree, working on the design and viability of the core of the T army (tanks, bio units) should be the priority, rather than giving them abusive cyclones/liberators whatever to artificially maintain a 50-50 winrate.
On July 21 2015 23:45 [PkF] Wire wrote: I agree, working on the design and viability of the core of the T army (tanks, bio units) should be the priority, rather than giving them abusive cyclones/liberators whatever to artificially maintain a 50-50 winrate.
Other than the addition of siege mode pickup, the removal of immortal's hardened shield is already a "work" on the viability of the tank. The less hardcounters the better the game.
On July 21 2015 22:15 lolias wrote: [quote] So you can actually defend with a unit that costs 200 Resources early on? That sounds amazing, i bet you are ahead after going fast Ravager, right?
Remember you are defending a unit that costs 300 resources. I've been wondering about going for a heavier queen style (4-6 queens) has anyone tried that?
They rape queens
If they get to the ATG mode in a good position, Queens are 2 shotted not one shot and I think you'd have 2 transfuses when it hits with a 4-6 queen style. I think (going off numbers haven't tried the style wanted to know if anyone else has) that 5/6 queens has enough DPS to kill a liberator before it manages to get to ATG.
I've not tried Ravager, how effective is it and what's the composition afterwards?
its 15 range and if he postions between the space of your 2 and 3 you wont have creep, you will move slow and he will kill your queens.
Do you even play LotV, cuz i see you thraw some ideas that are so lets say impractical ? Have you even watched the red bull torunament where 6 queens where sniped by 1 liberator before even getting to hit it and he used transfuse to.
At least try using that in LotV and then post... cuz man its so dumb.
If you're going for a 4-6 queen style you will easily have creep between your natural and third base. Slightly rich about throwing impractical ideas around, as I said I've not tried going 4-6 queens and was wondering if anyone had tried the style and how it fared, I'm not asserting that it's the best style or even good vs this just asking. Can you link me to the tournament where someone went 6 queens and lost them all to 1 liberator.
Watch the vods where qxc + beastyqt plays they are mostly going for the liberator + hellbat push. And nope you dont have creep toward you 3 when liberator + hellbat comes.
It comes at the 5 min.
My replys can be a bit assholish but im so tired of people defending IMBA stuff and mostly telling me to go ravager vs this when they even dont know if it works.
I'm not defending it, I think it's total BS I was just asking whether a heavy queen style has been tried. What time is the game in the 5hr vod?
edit - I watched the replay at 1:30 he had no creep spread because he hadn't gone for the style I was suggesting he could also have 2 more queens at the time it hits, if he has creep he can zone the liberator out before it gets into that position.
Yes it was used and it failed badly, you can see in one of the matches. The 5hr vod is the whole qualifer 3 of the redbull tournament. I dont have the time stamps where qxc plays with the liberators but you can find them in the video.
They style your talking about was used
Just to clarify my comment was about the second video, they didn't go for the style I was talking about and they executed it badly. I found the game I think at 3hr01min they sort of did what I was saying and I think it's a potentially good style but they didn't spread the creep aggressively enough they used one tumour and delayed spreading it after the first lay down on it. Now if that isn't fast enough you could forgo the first natural queens inject and lay a tumour straight away. If you also notice how much damage the queens did when they finally got within range I think having 4/5 queens with creep spread will be enough to zone it out and kill it. Will be trying this style because I think it has potential.
edit - thanks for finding the time must've found it at the sametime.
if you do found way please post the build and a replay... i have yet found any build to stop this with the exception of 2 base muta that sometimes wins if the other player is really bad.
I mostly roach/bane all in or roach/ravager all in because of this, it works cuz on 2 base the terran doesnt have that much and people dont really expect roach/bane all in LotV
On July 21 2015 20:47 Big J wrote: Anyone tried something like ling/bling/corruptor into Broodlord/Viper against bio/liberator yet? Sounds like the way to go (but it's pure theorycraft; haven't tried myself)
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
Try roaches and ravagers, kkkk
Ravagers dont work, the ability is to slow, and has only 8-9 range, he can dodge with 2 liberators all day since they buffed the time of switch from AA to ground mode. They broke the Liberator its way to OP
Two Master/GM players have now told you that they currently defend early liberators with ravagers. If you don't believe it, I can't help you. You better bring out some replays how ravager defense fails then.
On July 21 2015 12:06 GGzerG wrote: I think they make going Mutalisks completely pointless, but if you have good Ravenger micro, you can usually kill the liberators / push them away from what I have experienced.
So you can actually defend with a unit that costs 200 Resources early on? That sounds amazing, i bet you are ahead after going fast Ravager, right?
Remember you are defending a unit that costs 300 resources. I've been wondering about going for a heavier queen style (4-6 queens) has anyone tried that?
They rape queens
If they get to the ATG mode in a good position, Queens are 2 shotted not one shot and I think you'd have 2 transfuses when it hits with a 4-6 queen style. I think (going off numbers haven't tried the style wanted to know if anyone else has) that 5/6 queens has enough DPS to kill a liberator before it manages to get to ATG.
I've not tried Ravager, how effective is it and what's the composition afterwards?
Here is a replay of a game I just played against the ~5:00 liberator/hellbat push, in which I hold with queens and roaches. Played terribad afterwards and still lost despite probably having quite some lead multiple times but you'll find that what you are talking about - early queens, a bit of creepspread - is quite decent against that play. http://lotv.spawningtool.com/1023/
On July 21 2015 20:47 Big J wrote: Anyone tried something like ling/bling/corruptor into Broodlord/Viper against bio/liberator yet? Sounds like the way to go (but it's pure theorycraft; haven't tried myself)
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
Try roaches and ravagers, kkkk
Ravagers dont work, the ability is to slow, and has only 8-9 range, he can dodge with 2 liberators all day since they buffed the time of switch from AA to ground mode. They broke the Liberator its way to OP
Two Master/GM players have now told you that they currently defend early liberators with ravagers. If you don't believe it, I can't help you. You better bring out some replays how ravager defense fails then.
On July 21 2015 12:06 GGzerG wrote: I think they make going Mutalisks completely pointless, but if you have good Ravenger micro, you can usually kill the liberators / push them away from what I have experienced.
So you can actually defend with a unit that costs 200 Resources early on? That sounds amazing, i bet you are ahead after going fast Ravager, right?
Remember you are defending a unit that costs 300 resources. I've been wondering about going for a heavier queen style (4-6 queens) has anyone tried that?
They rape queens
If they get to the ATG mode in a good position, Queens are 2 shotted not one shot and I think you'd have 2 transfuses when it hits with a 4-6 queen style. I think (going off numbers haven't tried the style wanted to know if anyone else has) that 5/6 queens has enough DPS to kill a liberator before it manages to get to ATG.
I've not tried Ravager, how effective is it and what's the composition afterwards?
Here is a replay of a game I just played against the ~5:00 liberator/hellbat push, in which I hold with queens and roaches. Played terribad afterwards and still lost despite probably having quite some lead multiple times but you'll find that what you are talking about - early queens, a bit of creepspread - is quite decent against that play. http://lotv.spawningtool.com/1023/
This guy just seems like hes not that good tbh, he just parks them in the middle of the field where queens can hit them, hes not abusing them. You are supposed to use the airspace around the mineral lines to deny mining and force the queens to go in range of the ground attack and get melted.
On July 21 2015 20:57 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: [quote]
What part of you dont get to spire vs hellbat push + Liberator dont you understand ? If you go 2 base muta you will be able to defend it but you get so far behind that you die to the next bio push.
Because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg, zerg always has to have 1 base more then terran or protoss.
Try roaches and ravagers, kkkk
Ravagers dont work, the ability is to slow, and has only 8-9 range, he can dodge with 2 liberators all day since they buffed the time of switch from AA to ground mode. They broke the Liberator its way to OP
Two Master/GM players have now told you that they currently defend early liberators with ravagers. If you don't believe it, I can't help you. You better bring out some replays how ravager defense fails then.
On July 21 2015 12:06 GGzerG wrote: I think they make going Mutalisks completely pointless, but if you have good Ravenger micro, you can usually kill the liberators / push them away from what I have experienced.
So you can actually defend with a unit that costs 200 Resources early on? That sounds amazing, i bet you are ahead after going fast Ravager, right?
Remember you are defending a unit that costs 300 resources. I've been wondering about going for a heavier queen style (4-6 queens) has anyone tried that?
They rape queens
If they get to the ATG mode in a good position, Queens are 2 shotted not one shot and I think you'd have 2 transfuses when it hits with a 4-6 queen style. I think (going off numbers haven't tried the style wanted to know if anyone else has) that 5/6 queens has enough DPS to kill a liberator before it manages to get to ATG.
I've not tried Ravager, how effective is it and what's the composition afterwards?
Here is a replay of a game I just played against the ~5:00 liberator/hellbat push, in which I hold with queens and roaches. Played terribad afterwards and still lost despite probably having quite some lead multiple times but you'll find that what you are talking about - early queens, a bit of creepspread - is quite decent against that play. http://lotv.spawningtool.com/1023/
This guy just seems like hes not that good tbh, he just parks them in the middle of the field where queens can hit them, hes not abusing them. You are supposed to use the airspace around the mineral lines to deny mining and force the queens to go in range of the ground attack and get melted.
Yeah and I'm supposed to have a spore crawler around the third to prevent him from zoning the ramp and my roaches are a bit late (which is why I don't have ravagers for the push) and I could have crept towards my third earlier/better. But the idea is kind of clear and you can't tell me you don't see the potential here to stop the push, even if it is better executed.
I fully agree that this sort of play could be imbalanced because the range on the liberator is vast and it is very strong with certain terrain features, like as you say, when they park behind mineral lines in air space or above highgrounds. But at the moment it feels like one of many potentially broken tools. I mean, after all there are some quite strong 2base nydus plays (upload queens first, so they unload first and instaheal the nydus once it can be attacked) and all sorts of shit in the game too. I feel like you are taking it for granted that the LotV metagame will be saturated 3bases before anything happens, but at the current stage of the game I feel like 2basish plays are kind of strong in general which gives you options besides rushing a third as zerg and also means your opponents will often not put as much economical pressure on you that would force oyu to expand as fast.
I found something funny. On the liberator introduction page of BLZ's official SC2 blog, a lot of commenters criticized its design and graphic then they went nostalgic saying how they missed Goliath in BW. All I can tell them is, guys, remember that SC2's game designer is named DAVID?
In my experience (random player in beta) these Liberator / hellbat pushes are managed by two things: 1) good creep between natural and third (which means no 2 hatch muta because third is late and liberators will fall back home and mass up which is bad for muta player). 2) an army to crush hellbat push.
Liberator hellbat is strong because liberators zone or kill queens and other units which defend vs hellbats. Liberators by themselves can't do anything because you just micro a queen around it and they will die if they siege 2 or 3 times. So basically you have to stop hellbats and liberators will fallback home. So you either mass up lings + spines to crush hellbats when they engage spines, OR make enough roach/ravager to push them back.
Both spines and spored can't be killed by liberators so your task as a Zerg is to build a couple of spines and spores and defend them by crushing hellbats when they wanna kill static defence.
I thought I said my solution to it currently earlier in this thread: Few spores while going roach vs hellbat as lair finishes, get spire pop 5ish corruptors and go with roach speed to apply pressure while taking 3rd/transition. It's worked rather well for me so far...
On July 22 2015 02:26 Zode wrote: I thought I said my solution to it currently earlier in this thread: Few spores while going roach vs hellbat as lair finishes, get spire pop 5ish corruptors and go with roach speed to apply pressure while taking 3rd/transition. It's worked rather well for me so far...
Yes, you did. So what? You think the whole forum will read your solution and say "problem fixed bro!". Lets show other solutions as well, because this new liberator is out for like a couple of days only and i'm sure there are more ways to counter it.
I'm glad yours work, there are people here that won't believe neither you or me until they get what they want. I still feel faster third and ground defence is a better option because when terran won't commit hardcore, he will be ahead if you skip 3rd base.
How easy is this kind of an attack to scout? Seems like it is a strong push and if it is really difficult to scout it makes for a coinflippy early game which i personally hate.
On July 22 2015 03:02 RaFox17 wrote: How easy is this kind of an attack to scout? Seems like it is a strong push and if it is really difficult to scout it makes for a coinflippy early game which i personally hate.
you can't scout in LotV; unless you commit to allinning with overlords speed of course
I didn't take it against me but I think we need even more posts like this, and not saying "I already said it". Do it again. People think the build is godlike or something. It's strong, yes, but strategies haven't developed yet.
About scouting it: it's like scouting banshee hellbat build - basically you need to be on 2 gases at a certain point (don't know minutes because its different in LotV and I haven't memorized it yet), and if you are on 2 gases at that point, there aren't many other possible scenarios. Maybe a gimmick or two, but that goes for any scouted build.
On July 22 2015 03:08 _indigo_ wrote: I didn't take it against me but I think we need even more posts like this, and not saying "I already said it". Do it again. People think the build is godlike or something. It's strong, yes, but strategies haven't developed yet.
About scouting it: it's like scouting banshee hellbat build - basically you need to be on 2 gases at a certain point (don't know minutes because its different in LotV and I haven't memorized it yet), and if you are on 2 gases at that point, there aren't many other possible scenarios. Maybe a gimmick or two, but that goes for any scouted build.
Couldn't this be a regular banshee build? Also tank drops take two gases I think. And with the 12worker start I wouldn't take anything like that for granted. You have so many extra minerals compared to tech that taking a second gas early might just become standard macro, regardless what you want to do as you have the minerals anyways.
Tank drops won't have hellions because your factory will produce tanks and have a techlab. This is easier to scout IMO (also expect marines).
I agree about the banshee though. But for banshee you need spores anyway so it's the same counter. Tbh, you don't really need a counter for banshee, just spore defence.
For it to become a standard build ... well, if you go 3cc which is even more encouraged right now with less minerals in a patch, you won't have 2 gases - you just can't, or you wont have any units at all if you do. Maybe other builds with 2 gas will emerge, but until defending them is completely different than hellbat liberators there is no huge problem IMO. If you take a TvP perspective, there are a good handful of builds you just can't scout and it's still possible to adapt. You just have to try a couple of times, not simply decide that it can't be done.
Oh yeah of course, if you get all the scouting and not just two gas it's not that hard to find out its a liberator build. Which is quite an exotic scenario at the moment, especially since a good part of the terrans seem to have caught on to the fact that the first overlord is a freekill on many maps if it is sent in a useful position.
Yea, the ground dps is pretty high, but things are just OP in the beta, like when I massacre a Protoss army with Lurkers, it looks pretty OP, but since I know no real concrete Korean made strategies have surfaced and that we all suck, things that are "OP" might be totally balanced.
Well... in my experience you either don't scout anything or scout gases and factory. Because noone proxies factory for non-allin builds like that. There is another options aswell: drone scout and steal 1 gas. Pretty sure you won't see fast liberator hellbat push this way.
I'm aware this is not always possible in 4 player maps. Even in HotS some builds weren't scoutable on 4p maps. But to be fair, opening with 3hatch and creep between bases and preparing lings speed is not a bad opener in any scenario. Spores can get up pretty fast if you need them when you see more than 2 hellions.
On July 22 2015 04:08 jpg06051992 wrote: Yea, the ground dps is pretty high, but things are just OP in the beta, like when I massacre a Protoss army with Lurkers, it looks pretty OP, but since I know no real concrete Korean made strategies have surfaced and that we all suck, things that are "OP" might be totally balanced.
Lurkers has answer, Liberators in the early game... dont.
On July 22 2015 04:08 jpg06051992 wrote: Yea, the ground dps is pretty high, but things are just OP in the beta, like when I massacre a Protoss army with Lurkers, it looks pretty OP, but since I know no real concrete Korean made strategies have surfaced and that we all suck, things that are "OP" might be totally balanced.
Liberators in the early game... dont.
And that is the difference in OP
People just told you from their experience that they Do. But since you've already decided...
On July 21 2015 14:44 avilo wrote: Liberator is what the siege tank should be - allow you to leapfrog a push across the map. Tanks unfortunately don't do enough damage because they were nerfed shortly after wings of liberty was released and no one knew how to play the game at that time and thought mech was imba.
That's why most WOL/HOTS games are frustrating turtle mech games (for the person playing it and the opponent) because tanks suck in low numbers and you can NEVER move out on the map with them.
Liberators are great in low numbers you can really feel the impact of the unit because it does damage like the old siege tank used to. It really is zone control, your enemy can't just walk into an area with a liberator and be like "haha i don't care." Because they will lose a ton of units.
That is what the siege tank was SUPPOSED to be doing this entire time, making someone scared to a-move into a tank line or anywhere in range unless they were going to commit to the engagement and trade.
Liberator already has huge weaknesses/counters even more so than the siege tank. If you mis-position it and don't target it in a smart manner or cover it with other units, it dies in like 4 shots to things like hydras or stalkers lol.
I started playing the beta again and really am enjoying TvZ / TvT solely because of this unit adding so much to positional play.
With all the above being said, from my perspective of someone that has played 1000's of boring turtle mech games because the gameplay design of SC2 forced me to sit in my base till i had 20 ravens and 20 tanks etc...it feels really fun to be able to be out on the map with liberators and mech units doing a slow leap frog push brood war style and be able to trade against my opponent's units.
You enjoy the free beatings on Zerg Avilo? You never admit a T race is overpowered or needs to be tweaked. I have never seen you do that. On the contrary, your history of posting claims T deserves buffs when it doesn't. Just because a tank feels lackluster to you doesn't mean a brand new unit should compensate for it by being outrageously broken.
On July 22 2015 04:08 jpg06051992 wrote: Yea, the ground dps is pretty high, but things are just OP in the beta, like when I massacre a Protoss army with Lurkers, it looks pretty OP, but since I know no real concrete Korean made strategies have surfaced and that we all suck, things that are "OP" might be totally balanced.
Liberators in the early game... dont.
And that is the difference in OP
People just told you from their experience that they Do. But since you've already decided...
Yeah i see you defending terran always while complaining about zerg... sorry for not trusting you. But Ravagers cant deal with it in masters and 2 base muta puts you to far behind.
Its IMBA from 1 shoting hydras to other stuff.
You just want to keep it in the game for free wins
On July 22 2015 04:08 jpg06051992 wrote: Yea, the ground dps is pretty high, but things are just OP in the beta, like when I massacre a Protoss army with Lurkers, it looks pretty OP, but since I know no real concrete Korean made strategies have surfaced and that we all suck, things that are "OP" might be totally balanced.
Liberators in the early game... dont.
And that is the difference in OP
People just told you from their experience that they Do. But since you've already decided...
Yeah i see you defending terran always while complaining about zerg... sorry for not trusting you. But Ravagers cant deal with it in masters and 2 base muta puts you to far behind.
Its IMBA from 1 shoting hydras to other stuff.
You just want to keep it in the game for free wins
If you read my post you'd see I said that 2 hatch muta is a bad way to deal with it. Even ravagers aren't my suggestion really. Just lol.
On July 22 2015 04:08 jpg06051992 wrote: Yea, the ground dps is pretty high, but things are just OP in the beta, like when I massacre a Protoss army with Lurkers, it looks pretty OP, but since I know no real concrete Korean made strategies have surfaced and that we all suck, things that are "OP" might be totally balanced.
Liberators in the early game... dont.
And that is the difference in OP
People just told you from their experience that they Do. But since you've already decided...
Yeah i see you defending terran always while complaining about zerg... sorry for not trusting you. But Ravagers cant deal with it in masters and 2 base muta puts you to far behind.
Its IMBA from 1 shoting hydras to other stuff.
You just want to keep it in the game for free wins
If you read my post you'd see I said that 2 hatch muta is a bad way to deal with it. Even ravagers aren't my suggestion really. Just lol.
Yeah i know your just agreeing with other people that also dont know what they talk about. I know your basically a troll cuz your posts cant be this bad if your not a troll.
On July 22 2015 02:26 Zode wrote: I thought I said my solution to it currently earlier in this thread: Few spores while going roach vs hellbat as lair finishes, get spire pop 5ish corruptors and go with roach speed to apply pressure while taking 3rd/transition. It's worked rather well for me so far...
Corruptors only work vs small number of liberator. More than 7 or 8, an even number of corruptors get killed in 2 shot before they can do any real damage.
On July 22 2015 02:26 Zode wrote: I thought I said my solution to it currently earlier in this thread: Few spores while going roach vs hellbat as lair finishes, get spire pop 5ish corruptors and go with roach speed to apply pressure while taking 3rd/transition. It's worked rather well for me so far...
Corruptors only work vs small number of liberator. More than 7 or 8, an even number of corruptors get killed in 2 shot before they can do any real damage.
If you get to that point, Vipers with PB are the best answer... the problem is you dont get to that point.
I only feel it's a problem in kind of the early mid-game, when they siege up over the abyss and put your mineral lines under fire. If they were only allowed to siege over ground, even though they don't travel on ground, I'd have no problems whatsoever with them.
Im playing random too. (toss was my main) I played a couple of ZvT (i the zerg) all games i kept the T in 2 base for so long, but he managed to get a 3rd just by few siege tanks couple of liberators and a planetary.. I think its pretty strong with PDDs and raven around. I don't know how to deal with that
I could be wrong guys, But i think it's called beta for a reason...If we instantly patch something after a build surfaces after only what not even 2 weeks? Yes i know it was brought on by a patch...But I think asking for another patch to revert or change it is a little too soon. There isn't enough time to consider it overpowered at this point, It's currently too strong but we also have to give it enough time for all options to be explored. If blizzard patches something every time people scream we will be having patches weekly.
Fussing with ZergLingShepherd1 for anyone on here is a waste of time. He takes his time to complain in every topic and every twitch chat. We can have zergs win 5 GSL and WCS finals in a row in lotv and I bet he will still believe zerg is too weak. I honestly not even sure if he has played the beta since he's watched QXC.
On July 22 2015 10:41 -StrifeX- wrote: I could be wrong guys, But i think it's called beta for a reason...If we instantly patch something after a build surfaces after only what not even 2 weeks? Yes i know it was brought on by a patch...But I think asking for another patch to revert or change it is a little too soon. There isn't enough time to consider it overpowered at this point, It's currently too strong but we also have to give it enough time for all options to be explored. If blizzard patches something every time people scream we will be having patches weekly.
Well, it's called a beta for a reason. They should do whatever they want with it. When the build doesn't go into the direction they want it to go they should straight up nerf it down, regardless whether it is overpowered or not. Design comes first!
I really hope they don't "tone down:" the liberator. It's so freaking early that nobody knows. Don't make the same fucking mistake that they made with the seige tank, like Avilo said, it was ruined in WOL beta and never once has it been buffed back up to what its original purpose was - zone control. And mines have no real punch either. As it is, mobile armies are really the only thing that works anymore, because zone control options are so weak. the liberator isn't really a turtling unit, it's a unit that creates null zones on the battlefield permitting safe movement of the rest of your army. It's similar to engaging on creep- something that nobody wants to do, but sometimes you have to. And finding ways of circumventing it are important. As it is, I haven't heard anything beyond "LOL AG AND HELLBATS WAT GG BLIZZ" which just doesn't make sense. I haven't seen or heard of an AG/hellbat push that has broken the already chaotic meta. I hope blizzard has learned that betas are not a time to rebalance units that aren't abhorrently broken. This game is like good wine and cheese. it takes time to mature, and there needs to be months of feedback before substantial changes are made. AG doesn't even have the splash potential of tanks. It's possible to flood the AG field with lings and bring in ravagers to finish the job, and the lib is designed to be an air superiority unit. it's still very vulnerable. people just don't know how to exploit its weaknesses well enough because they haven't had enough time.
I think to deal with liberator, some buff will be given to the ravager, perhaps a longer range for the bile shot, allowing you to shoot outside the liberator's AG zone, but along with a longer cooldown so you can't just abuse that ability.
The problem with the liberator is that its so increadibly cheap and easily produced to counter essentially anything zerg does in the mid game - It stops all early game aggression from zerg, it completely thwarts mutas and one shots zerg's other Anti air (hydra). This forces zerg to tech straight into viper in order to have a chance against a liberator swarm. Which of course doesn't help you when the libs are knocking at your door within 3 minuets into the game.
Honestly for how strong it is, I feel the liberator needs to be sitting in the center of their bombard range, sitting safely a good 4 squares away just makes the unit feel unbeatable to a race that has no early AA option.
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.
Honestly for how strong it is, I feel the liberator needs to be sitting in the center of their bombard range, sitting safely a good 4 squares away just makes the unit feel unbeatable to a race that has no early AA option.
The advantage of the Liberator over the Siege tank is clear: Better in smaller numbers and much better all-round unit which especially comes in handy early/midgame. The advantage of the Siege Tank: Late game it scales better + you have frontline to soak damage for the tanks (deathball FYI). Late game you also won't be as exposed to AA as you likely will mass Cyclones too.
But those differences are kinda boring. The tanks then becomes a unit you add to the deathball in the late game. And the Liberators is something you get in the early/midgame.
If - as you proposed - it had shorter range, it would be a ton weaker vs ground-to-air units such as Stalkers, Marines and Hydralisks. If its balanced around that, then it might be easier to disgunish its role from the Siege tank. However, if its weaker vs those units, then it needs to be even better vs AA units and ground-only units. Is that really desireable?
I've spent lots of hours thinking about its role, and I can't see any way where it really fits into the terran army. In fact I think it probably would have been better to give the anti-ground mode to the BC and remove the Liberator. That will make sure that all units have interesting weakness's and strenghts and that the BC will be more fun to use as well.
Honestly for how strong it is, I feel the liberator needs to be sitting in the center of their bombard range, sitting safely a good 4 squares away just makes the unit feel unbeatable to a race that has no early AA option.
The advantage of the Liberator over the Siege tank is clear: Better in smaller numbers and much better all-round unit which especially comes in handy early/midgame. The advantage of the Siege Tank: Late game it scales better + you have frontline to soak damage for the tanks (deathball FYI). Late game you also won't be as exposed to AA as you likely will mass Cyclones too.
But those differences are kinda boring. The tanks then becomes a unit you add to the deathball in the late game. And the Liberators is something you get in the early/midgame.
If - as you proposed - it had shorter range, it would be a ton weaker vs ground-to-air units such as Stalkers, Marines and Hydralisks. If its balanced around that, then it might be easier to disgunish its role from the Siege tank. However, if its weaker vs those units, then it needs to be even better vs AA units and ground-only units. Is that really desireable?
I've spent lots of hours thinking about its role, and I can't see any way where it really fits into the terran army. In fact I think it probably would have been better to give the anti-ground mode to the BC and remove the Liberator. That will make sure that all units have interesting weakness's and strenghts and that the BC will be more fun to use as well.
Definitely agree that its role should have been the BC ones to begin with. But I don't see why its antiair would need to be buffed if its ground mode is weaker. Its antiair is really good against certain units and in general quite good against bigger clumps of enemies as far as I have seen. (though no unit tester involved so far TT) Like what you are saying runs under the assumption that the unit right now is a) balanced b) units in general have a certain, equal power level
I'm not sure about a) and b) is certainly not the case. There are (much) better and (much) worse units in the game. Its anti air mode in combination with being a mobile flyer itself and having some ground capabilities makes it much more attractive as splash support anti-air than thors when playing against units like mutalisks.
But I don't see why its antiair would need to be buffed if its ground mode is weaker
Well weaker is very unspecific. Under the assumption that the unit basically has no range at all but just a circle very close to the Liberator, that will be an extreme nerf to the Liberators ground-mode. So it would need to be compensated in some way, and I don't see how there is any real compensation that creates interesting dynamics here.
Regardless of how you tweak/modify the unit, it's always gonna end up creating some heavy overlaps with the Siege Tank/Thor/Cyclone/Viking.
But I don't see why its antiair would need to be buffed if its ground mode is weaker
Well weaker is very unspecific. Under the assumption that the unit basically has no range at all but just a circle very close to the Liberator, that will be an extreme nerf to the Liberators ground-mode. So it would need to be compensated in some way, and I don't see how there is any real compensation that creates interesting dynamics here.
In that scenario it would be a strong anti-air unit for certain situations, with the option to turn it into a sort of widow mine against low-midtier units. "You can't go there with roaches, hydralisks, ultralisks, zealots etc, you need to defuse the liberator first with artillery" It would still be off use after you got it for its antiair role.
This is not from a design point of view of course, from that I take the stance that the unit is unncessary and for me personally the siege circle-unsiege-if-the-opponent-finds-a good-angle dynamic feels clunky to use. (but other people might be ok with that) But from a role/usability point of view I could see the unit still being useful. Though I'm not sure range is the real problem. 75dps for 300resources is plainly stupid. It is more than stimmed marines of the same price have but without the armor/splash weaknesses and on a flyer which is invulnerable against 50% of the units in the game to begin with. It is more than 2times what immortals do against armored. And all of that on a flyer. When seeing such a sort of unit the only way it can turn out balanced is that the unit can be supermegahardcountered, in the case of the liberator that it will eventually create a dynamic in which the opponent instaloses if he touches the circles but has ways to kill the liberator without it ever getting shots of.
On July 22 2015 18:07 Energizer wrote: The problem with the liberator is that its so increadibly cheap and easily produced to counter essentially anything zerg does in the mid game - It stops all early game aggression from zerg, it completely thwarts mutas and one shots zerg's other Anti air (hydra). This forces zerg to tech straight into viper in order to have a chance against a liberator swarm. Which of course doesn't help you when the libs are knocking at your door within 3 minuets into the game.
Honestly for how strong it is, I feel the liberator needs to be sitting in the center of their bombard range, sitting safely a good 4 squares away just makes the unit feel unbeatable to a race that has no early AA option.
It will be nerfed, only terrans at this point are trying to silence this IMBA stuff.
On July 22 2015 18:07 Energizer wrote: The problem with the liberator is that its so increadibly cheap and easily produced to counter essentially anything zerg does in the mid game - It stops all early game aggression from zerg, it completely thwarts mutas and one shots zerg's other Anti air (hydra). This forces zerg to tech straight into viper in order to have a chance against a liberator swarm. Which of course doesn't help you when the libs are knocking at your door within 3 minuets into the game.
Honestly for how strong it is, I feel the liberator needs to be sitting in the center of their bombard range, sitting safely a good 4 squares away just makes the unit feel unbeatable to a race that has no early AA option.
It will be nerfed, only terrans at this point are trying to silence this IMBA stuff.
And you will always be there to whine on bnet while vigourly defending clearly op traits of your own race
Anyways, liberators are bit strong and tanks don't really do the justice of its name. As much as the roles overlap, can't help but to feel the liberator ground damage should have went to siege tank in upgrade form and liberator remain for AA purposes only
You can't go there with roaches, hydralisks, ultralisks, zealots etc,
If it no longer can outrange Hydras I think it would be a huge nerf vs that unit in medium-larger engagements. Instead it's utility will mainly be vs units that can't shoot back at it, which makes it overlap with the Banshee.
But from a role/usability point of view I could see the unit still being useful.
Yes, it has a role as I described in my initial post. It's definitely very strong when you can build them in the early midgame and they do well vs everything + function well in low numbers. But I very much dislike how that "role" works. I prefer when units have clear weakness's. Building tanks vs liberators in the midgame should have a significant difference in terms of how they impact the playstyle with different advantages and disadvantages. The same thing should be the case for Thors/Vikings vs Liberators when you use it for AA.
You can't go there with roaches, hydralisks, ultralisks, zealots etc,
If it no longer can outrange Hydras I think it would be a huge nerf vs that unit in medium-larger engagements. Instead it's utility will mainly be vs units that can't shoot back at it, which makes it overlap with the Banshee.
yeah, but that's not going against what I said. You don't get it for the antihydra, but if it can still take down 1-2 of them you can be pretty happy under the assumption that the liberator has done its job against e.g. mutas already. There are many such dynamics in the game where you get a unit to do a job and retain it and eventually if the role isn't needed anymore you trade it inefficiently, which is still better than not trading it and doesn't change the fact that the unit already gave you an edge somewhere. Not that you really want to do it in the case of the liberator, but say you defended mutas and have a few of them and next thing your zerg is allinning you with roach hydra. Those liberators are still going to take down a bunch of roach/hydra before going down, even if they can't zone them.
yeah, but that's not going against what I said. You don't get it for the antihydra, but if it can still take down 1-2 of them you can be pretty happy under the assumption that the liberator has done its job against e.g. mutas already.
Which isn't really different from how the Thor works. My issue here is that I don't see any interesting dynamics coming out of using the Liberator for AA relative to the thor as AA. That's not to say that you aren't rewarded for mixing the units together.
But what are the strategic implications? Does it allow/reward players to execute very different styles if the terran/his opponent opts for Liberators instead of Thors and vice versa? When the zerg sees Thors (and no Liberators) does this have a huge strategic implication. Is gameplan/strategy X now much weaker and is he heavily rewarded for switching to gameplan Y? And what happens when they are mixed together. Does that have a specific disadvantage/advantage as well or is it always optimal to mix them together due to synergy?
But I don't see why its antiair would need to be buffed if its ground mode is weaker
Well weaker is very unspecific. Under the assumption that the unit basically has no range at all but just a circle very close to the Liberator, that will be an extreme nerf to the Liberators ground-mode. So it would need to be compensated in some way, and I don't see how there is any real compensation that creates interesting dynamics here.
Regardless of how you tweak/modify the unit, it's always gonna end up creating some heavy overlaps with the Siege Tank/Thor/Cyclone/Viking.
Here's a radical idea, they change how the units all function to stop that Overlap. Remove the Liberator (I say that because I really dislike the model) create something that is purely for AA splash and then buff the siege tanks zone control on the ground. The cyclone just needs to be removed, not because it's inherently broken or unbeatable but because it's just not a fun unit design, moving into a zone auto locking and keeping something in a huge circle isn't too skilled. My suggestion would actually be to make it a donut shape around the unit, so it's a skill balancing the units inside that donut ring and also allows people to charge in past that point to break the tether, this wouldn't affect it's strength when in low numbers but would make massing them much less viable. I also dislike the model for the cyclone someone suggested using the diamondback model I would propose a base that's similar but then keep the missile pods for the turret.
The initial build is strong but counter-able but you have to be preparing for it before you can even scout it.
It is definitely very strong, probably too much in the early game, but it is not as bad and with some tweaks it could be pretty much okay. But after dying helplessly to it the first time, after thinking was able to defend it with ravager, there is this kind of dance between ravagers shots and unsiege from the liberator, if they tweaks these numbers it could be okay. I am also experimenting with overlord drops to move the queen away from disruptor circle each time they siege up and drop them in range, looks it might be doable, as long as you baby sit your overlord and don't let it die when the liberator are in flying mod.
Anyway, problem is in this beta I don't know at all the level of the players I play against, obviously if I face a GM his timing will be much crisper than mine and I should lose, no matter if the unit is balanced or not. Anyway, it will need to testing from the pros before we can draw any conclusion, it looks definitely strong though.
yeah, but that's not going against what I said. You don't get it for the antihydra, but if it can still take down 1-2 of them you can be pretty happy under the assumption that the liberator has done its job against e.g. mutas already.
Which isn't really different from how the Thor works. My issue here is that I don't see any interesting dynamics coming out of using the Liberator for AA relative to the thor as AA. That's not to say that you aren't rewarded for mixing the units together.
But what are the strategic implications? Does it allow/reward players to execute very different styles if the terran/his opponent opts for Liberators instead of Thors and vice versa? When the zerg sees Thors (and no Liberators) does this have a huge strategic implication. Is gameplan/strategy X now much weaker and is he heavily rewarded for switching to gameplan Y? And what happens when they are mixed together. Does that have a specific disadvantage/advantage as well or is it always optimal to mix them together due to synergy?
I agree, but thats the design part. Which for me doesnt justify a theoretical compensation for a theoretical nerf. It means they should go back to the drawing board with the unit or a different one (e.g the Thor) to create the diversity you argue for.
Remove the Liberator (I say that because I really dislike the model) create something that is purely for AA splash and then buff the siege tanks zone control on the ground. The cyclone just needs to be removed, not because it's inherently broken or unbeatable but because it's just not a fun unit design, moving into a zone auto locking and keeping something in a huge circle isn't too skilled.
Below are my suggestions for terran mech partly inspired by what worked in BW and my own ideas:
Thor - Moves faster (2.25-2.5) - Two attack transformations: - Transformation 1 = Very good vs armored units (much better than it was in HOTS) - Transformation 2 = Larger splash radius but no bonus vs light
It's default role will be the same as the Goliath had in BW (AA vs armored), so it will replace the Viking (or Cyclone) currently have. However, when facing a large amount of enemy air units, it can transform and do signficant amount of damage due to the large splash radius. It's however definitely weaker vs Mutas in low numbers.
Viking - More damage vs light than armored (still single target) - Range = 7 - Upgrade that increas speed to 3.25-3.5.
The reason I am not giving the Viking the splash-role is that it will be too easy to completely shut enemy air harass (Mutas/Phoenix). Instead, I believe the Thor vs Mutalisk dynamic will be more interesting due to it being more about mobility.
The Viking will then be better vs light air units in small numbers + also capable of assting the Thor in terms of mobility.
With the Viking no longer being good vs armored air units, it also mean that its no longer this Viper/broodlord/dropplay shutdowner. That obviously has a few balance consequences that must be adressed, and I think that will both improve micro interactions and the gameplay dynamic (because the shutdown role of the Viking is really dumb imo).
TLDR AA Unit roles - Vs armored air units --> You get Thors - Vs light air units in small numbers --> Vikings typically your best bet. - Vs light air units in larger numbers --> Thors in splash-mode or you can opt to mass Vikings.
Siege Tank With new econ, just buff the tank and make it 2 supply. With the redesigned Viking that can no longer shut down enemy dropplay/air spellcasters, turtle mech will be nerfed anyway.
Cyclone I think it can still exist, but it must be a supportive unit. I imagine that it starts with heavily nerfed air and ground attacks, + lower max range. Thus its core stats will be heavily inferior to the Siege Tank.
Instead, it should have two strenghts: (1) A debuff/buff ability that makes it synergize with friendly units during teamfights. This ability shouldn't scale well.
(2) Give it extra damage vs structures, so it can assist Hellions/Banshee's when harassing as static defense won't shut down mech harass so hard.
Remove the Liberator (I say that because I really dislike the model) create something that is purely for AA splash and then buff the siege tanks zone control on the ground. The cyclone just needs to be removed, not because it's inherently broken or unbeatable but because it's just not a fun unit design, moving into a zone auto locking and keeping something in a huge circle isn't too skilled.
God we agree on that. My suggestion is based on learning from the BW unit roles. In that game teran mech AA armored is the Goliath which is relatively mobile and a ground unit. The splash unit (Valkyrie) functions better vs light units (since they typically are more massable) and is massable.
The issue with the Cyclone as the AA vs armored is that the whole lock-on --> move back isn't fun at all and it also suffers from the same design problem as the Liberator in that it being good vs everything (no real strategic weakness).
Given that I would actually change the Thor to make it more like a Goliath. That implies making it somewhat faster (around 2.5 MS), and give it a strong anti-air vs armored attack with around 9-10 range.
On top of that I like to keep the transformation mode so it can transform into the splash-attack. Relative to the Sc2-version, it should not deal extra damage vs light but rather have a larger splash radius.
The reason I am not giving the Viking the splash-role is that it will be too easy to completely shut enemy air harass (Mutas/Phoenix). Instead, I believe the Thor vs Mutalisk dynamic will be more interesting due to it being more about mobility.
The Viking, however, must also be changed due to the Thor being the new AA vs armored unit. I propose to give it strong single-target damage vs. light units. This way it will be better vs light air units in small numbers + it will also be able to assist the Thor when it lacks mobility.
I also propse to give the unit a speed upgrade to 3.25-3.5, but reduce its range to 7. This creates a dynamic where it can kinda kite Mutalisks, but it will take a bit of damage in the process.
TLDR: Unit roles - Vs armored air units --> You get Thors - Vs light air units in small numbers --> Vikings typically your best bet. - Vs light air units in larger numbers --> Thors in splash-mode or you can opt to mass Vikings.
Synergize effect: Even with Thors faster MS, it’s still slow vs enemy air units, the Vikings can help support them, but obviously can’t deal with a big Mutalisk flock by them selves. Thus you need to kite with Vikings and lure enemy Mutas into Thor range.
I agree mostly what I would be saying is make the 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.
I would prefer to have the Cyclone removed but I have my doubts that would happen which is why I suggest it's lock on radius to be a donut ring around the edge of it's current vision this allows more mobile units to bomb past breaking the lock on, also it means keeping the units inside the ring is harder than just following the units movement. It also doesn't affect the units strength in what I think the intended role is which is using low numbers 3-4 to snipe out key units.
Would love the Thor to change into a Goliath but I think your Goliath is a bit catch all.
The viking change is where I completely disagree, the unit should stay as a unit that focuses key units down from afar, what I would prefer to see is a method of making it's transformation more useful because currently you mainly see it after someone has killed all the collosi and perhaps in mech where someone gains air lead and you don't want to throw the units away.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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 23:49 _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 23:49 _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 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 ...
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.
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.
So you think the unit is fine as is? Assuming the siege tank got buffed to the point in can control space what would your suggested adjustments be to the liberator? And if the tank didn't get buffed what nerf would you suggest for the Liberator?
On July 23 2015 06:16 _indigo_ wrote: 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.
Since this is directed at me for this guys post
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 ...
I think I will explain my reasoning. The liberator doesn't require a ridiculous amount of micro to use with it's aa it's very static there's not many more tricks to it than A move or to focus fire. The ATG requires no movement or micro tricks, it just requires the person to set it up in a optimal position. Spores do not shut down the liberator as a harass based unit, on all of the maps there's a spot that the Liberator can hit one of your 3 bases mineral lines without being affected by a sporecrawler. Uprooting and rooting a spore takes 7 seconds I don't have the precise switching time for the liberator but it is substantially below that number spores are only effective in that manner in the lategame when you have more creep space to maneuver. It's a totally misguided post.
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.
They should keep the damage and the AG mode but revert the new changes. Liberator can be massed and you dont need it early, and taking a bit more time to switch modes would be the weakness of this unit.
We both know its broken at this point.... i even told you about this in your chat and that is a free win vs adept openers.
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.
They should keep the damage and the AG mode but revert the new changes. Liberator can be massed and you dont need it early, and taking a bit more time to switch modes would be the weakness of this unit.
We both know its broken at this point.... i even told you about this in your chat and that is a free win vs adept openers.
It needs to be changed.
No, it doesn't need to keep those attributes they're the problem not the time which it arrives or how easy it is to mass. People can manage to mass ravens so unless you're severely nerfing it's cost or buildtime people will still find a way.
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.
They should keep the damage and the AG mode but revert the new changes. Liberator can be massed and you dont need it early, and taking a bit more time to switch modes would be the weakness of this unit.
We both know its broken at this point.... i even told you about this in your chat and that is a free win vs adept openers.
It needs to be changed.
No, it doesn't need to keep those attributes they're the problem not the time which it arrives or how easy it is to mass. People can manage to mass ravens so unless you're severely nerfing it's cost or buildtime people will still find a way.
Your right.... but i finally got my answer on how to beat this awful shit from a much better player then me and its not ravager/roach like everyone is saying without thinking.
Do your queen build 4/5 queens like you told me ( you suggested before when i sended that redbull tournament video ) but get overlord drop and overlord speed, use it to bypass the liberator zone and snipe the liberator, he will be forced to retreat it.
And you can also do the "warp prrism micro from HotS" with the overlord against hellbats to.
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.
They should keep the damage and the AG mode but revert the new changes. Liberator can be massed and you dont need it early, and taking a bit more time to switch modes would be the weakness of this unit.
We both know its broken at this point.... i even told you about this in your chat and that is a free win vs adept openers.
It needs to be changed.
No, it doesn't need to keep those attributes they're the problem not the time which it arrives or how easy it is to mass. People can manage to mass ravens so unless you're severely nerfing it's cost or buildtime people will still find a way.
Your right.... but i finally got my answer on how to beat this awful shit from a much better player then me and its not ravager/roach like everyone is saying without thinking.
Do your queen build 4/5 queens like you told me ( you suggested before when i sended that redbull tournament video ) but get overlord drop and overlord speed, use it to bypass the liberator zone and snipe the liberator, he will be forced to retreat it.
And you can also do the "warp prrism micro from HotS" with the overlord against hellbats to.
Will try that, but my only question is what happens if they abuse the airspace to hit a mineral line on some of the maps I'm assuming it's a case of stopping them from reaching that point using the creep spread from the queen opener for vision/mobility. Because the ATG is a projectile can you lift the queens before it hits negating any damage?
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.
They should keep the damage and the AG mode but revert the new changes. Liberator can be massed and you dont need it early, and taking a bit more time to switch modes would be the weakness of this unit.
We both know its broken at this point.... i even told you about this in your chat and that is a free win vs adept openers.
It needs to be changed.
No, it doesn't need to keep those attributes they're the problem not the time which it arrives or how easy it is to mass. People can manage to mass ravens so unless you're severely nerfing it's cost or buildtime people will still find a way.
Your right.... but i finally got my answer on how to beat this awful shit from a much better player then me and its not ravager/roach like everyone is saying without thinking.
Do your queen build 4/5 queens like you told me ( you suggested before when i sended that redbull tournament video ) but get overlord drop and overlord speed, use it to bypass the liberator zone and snipe the liberator, he will be forced to retreat it.
And you can also do the "warp prrism micro from HotS" with the overlord against hellbats to.
Will try that, but my only question is what happens if they abuse the airspace to hit a mineral line on some of the maps I'm assuming it's a case of stopping them from reaching that point using the creep spread from the queen opener for vision/mobility. Because the ATG is a projectile can you lift the queens before it hits negating any damage?
Get the spore behind the mineral line it wont reach your drones. Usually we put the spore in middle of the mineral line.... but yeah liberator is "special"..... Or on some maps you have to put the spore behind the mineral line but either 60 degrees to the right or left, depending on the map.
I dont know if you can lift the queens before the damage but i think its not worth it since the hellbats are there and you need to snipe that Liberator fast.
I still think their IMBA, i wonder how will Protoss defend it tho.... without being forced into stargate openers like they did vs cyclone.
Flying AOE AA is always imba because it always has a critical mass where it can 1 or 2 shot everything that flys.
Because of the way flying units can stack and use terrain, it's the ultimate deathball style. The fact that the liberator also has such a powerful AtG mode is more insult to injury. A defensive terran player could mass nothing but liberators as a late game army, leap frogging deployed liberators to keep control of the ground while keeping enough in AA mode to keep back any number of flying units.
Normally with an AA unit you can counter them by switching heavily into ground units, like when a zerg over makes corruptors. Liberators do not suffer from this. There is no punishement for over making the unit, and mass switches into say stalkers, hydras or marines in an effort to punish the liberator will just cause the liberator player to move back a little and then deploy all liberators into AtG mode and annihilate everything.
Simply put I cannot be less happy with the design of this unit. Tweaking the damage or health of the unit is irrelivant, apart from the 'difficulty' of massing them there is literally no downside to building as many liberators as you possibly can.
Yeah the AOE AA part is actually what makes it very different from tanks. You shouldn't be forced to use long range air units to counter their siege mode in sufficient numbers (with proper support, they can actually become impossible to attack without ranged phoenix/tempests/carriers).
On July 23 2015 08:15 Kharnage wrote: Flying AOE AA is always imba because it always has a critical mass where it can 1 or 2 shot everything that flys.
Because of the way flying units can stack and use terrain, it's the ultimate deathball style. The fact that the liberator also has such a powerful AtG mode is more insult to injury. A defensive terran player could mass nothing but liberators as a late game army, leap frogging deployed liberators to keep control of the ground while keeping enough in AA mode to keep back any number of flying units.
Normally with an AA unit you can counter them by switching heavily into ground units, like when a zerg over makes corruptors. Liberators do not suffer from this. There is no punishement for over making the unit, and mass switches into say stalkers, hydras or marines in an effort to punish the liberator will just cause the liberator player to move back a little and then deploy all liberators into AtG mode and annihilate everything.
Simply put I cannot be less happy with the design of this unit. Tweaking the damage or health of the unit is irrelivant, apart from the 'difficulty' of massing them there is literally no downside to building as many liberators as you possibly can.
True but the same concept can be aplyed to cyclone to since it has massive range just like Liberator and can shoot both ground and air. The only difference is that it takes time to get it, late game to form the deathball and have both upgrades.
Both units are to good units overall with no real weakness.
On July 23 2015 09:15 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: True but the same concept can be aplyed to cyclone to sinc eit has massive range just like Liberator and can shoot both ground and air. The only difference is that it takes to late game to form the deathball and have both upgrades.
Both units are to good units overall with no real weakness.
I don't understand your posts. You use grand hyperbole to the point that it makes me wonder if you're even serious.
How are liberators weakness free? In ground mode, you can shoot them from the air, in air mode, they take hits from the ground.
Cyclones have problems too, and this game isn't rock paper scissors. Asymmetry is the name of the game, and arguing that one unit is strong is missing the point of the game. Terran has been lagging behind severely lately, and a unit that has strong zone control is something we've needed for a long, long time. Just because current meta doesn't work against it does not mean the unit is too strong. You clearly need to work on your mindset of balance, because thinking like yours is why the game is missing a lot of color and flavor like properly powerful seige tanks. And by your logic, I could argue that the disruptor is too strong, or the ravager is, or the lurker with "OMG look what happens when you run a bio ball into a ball of lurkers."
The point of these units is that they fit into the core army. So they need to be powerful and relatively well rounded units, just like all the current new units are. Have you tried overwhelming the liberator AG zone with zerglings and walking in your ravagers behind it to drop their micro shots? The lib is relatively soft and limited, and a terran with a big ball of libs is just asking to be flanked. If they've made an impenetrable defense, just expand like crazy and win via attrition.
Map design will also play a key in the lib's overall potency. When there are 4-5 chokes to control, the lib will be much more limited. Mapmakers have the ability to basically design the balance of the liberator (as well as making space behind the worker line so the lib can no longer hit workers out of range of AA buildings for example)
On July 23 2015 08:15 Kharnage wrote: Flying AOE AA is always imba because it always has a critical mass where it can 1 or 2 shot everything that flys.
Because of the way flying units can stack and use terrain, it's the ultimate deathball style. The fact that the liberator also has such a powerful AtG mode is more insult to injury. A defensive terran player could mass nothing but liberators as a late game army, leap frogging deployed liberators to keep control of the ground while keeping enough in AA mode to keep back any number of flying units.
Normally with an AA unit you can counter them by switching heavily into ground units, like when a zerg over makes corruptors. Liberators do not suffer from this. There is no punishement for over making the unit, and mass switches into say stalkers, hydras or marines in an effort to punish the liberator will just cause the liberator player to move back a little and then deploy all liberators into AtG mode and annihilate everything.
Simply put I cannot be less happy with the design of this unit. Tweaking the damage or health of the unit is irrelivant, apart from the 'difficulty' of massing them there is literally no downside to building as many liberators as you possibly can.
put me as the zerg in a ZVT where this happens, with a standard game where I haven't already lost due to other circumstances, and I'll absolutely crush that lib massing player. Newsflash, the lib is easily flanked and ground units are supposed to be its counter. It's not a primary attack unit, and sucks in that role. It's a ZONE CONTROL unit, just like the lurker.
On July 23 2015 06:28 Ovid wrote:
I think I will explain my reasoning. The liberator doesn't require a ridiculous amount of micro to use with it's aa it's very static there's not many more tricks to it than A move or to focus fire. The ATG requires no movement or micro tricks, it just requires the person to set it up in a optimal position. Spores do not shut down the liberator as a harass based unit, on all of the maps there's a spot that the Liberator can hit one of your 3 bases mineral lines without being affected by a sporecrawler. Uprooting and rooting a spore takes 7 seconds I don't have the precise switching time for the liberator but it is substantially below that number spores are only effective in that manner in the lategame when you have more creep space to maneuver. It's a totally misguided post.
optimal positioning is the phrase you're not really getting. That changes map to map, minute to minute, zone to zone, and requires a TON of careful planning. Planning and strategy are important things that scII is sadly lacking, and it's something that the protoss have with sentries, but zerg and terran have lacked until now with no lurkers and garbage tanks.
And like I mentioned earlier. Liberators can exploit the current map pool, but players also exploited the high ground natural in lost temple, and arguing that as a reason for nerfing the tank, thor, or colossus is equally silly. That issue can be solved by extending the ground behind the minerals to allow for a spore/cannon/turret to reach a lib that is in range of the mineral line.
^ Lurkers can be outranged. Liberators dont cuz 15 range same as Cyclone, Its easier and earlier then a Lurker to use.
And you tell me this are all the same ? Such BS.
PS. Disruptor is not OP and its not used for zoning... Ravager is beyond useless at this point and no one is really using it since the nerf since it cost to much for such an easy to dodge ability.
Normally with an AA unit you can counter them by switching heavily into ground units, like when a zerg over makes corruptors. Liberators do not suffer from this. There is no punishement for over making the unit, and mass switches into say stalkers, hydras or marines in an effort to punish the liberator will just cause the liberator player to move back a little and then deploy all liberators into AtG mode and annihilate everything.
That's not true. If there're nothing else but liberators alone, mass stalkers/hydras/marines can easily shoot them down. Don't forget that in AG mode liberator attacks SINGLE target within an area one at a time. Without any other supporting forces, even a lot of liberators covering a huge area in AG mode can not deal with mass anti-air forces.
Normally with an AA unit you can counter them by switching heavily into ground units, like when a zerg over makes corruptors. Liberators do not suffer from this. There is no punishement for over making the unit, and mass switches into say stalkers, hydras or marines in an effort to punish the liberator will just cause the liberator player to move back a little and then deploy all liberators into AtG mode and annihilate everything.
That's not true. If there're nothing else but liberators alone, mass stalkers/hydras/marines can easily shoot them down. Don't forget that in AG mode liberator attacks SINGLE target within an area one at a time. Without any other supporting forces, even a lot of liberators covering a huge area in AG mode can not deal with mass anti-air forces.
This is one of the great issues with liberators being FLYING units however. They can use the terrain to make flanking difficult if not impossible. Mass stalkers would be pretty terrible, worse than anything else in fact, at cutting down a mass liberator fleet since stalkers over kill and would die to 2 shots from a liberator.
Mass marines only have range 4, which means it would take a huge positional blunder for the liberator player to expose the liberator fleet. Not only that, but terrans can use PF's to create an unassailable position which the libs can be positioned over.
Don't forget, you can't medivac drop / overlord drop onto a lib position due to their overwhelming AOE, so you've be stimming marines in without support to try and close the distance.
Hydras are perhaps the strongest of the ground to air units when it comes to dealing with mass libs, assuming the range and speed upgrades are researched, but with them being 1 shot I think 30 deployed libs would utter destroy them before they could deal any meaningful damage to the terran.
Normally with an AA unit you can counter them by switching heavily into ground units, like when a zerg over makes corruptors. Liberators do not suffer from this. There is no punishement for over making the unit, and mass switches into say stalkers, hydras or marines in an effort to punish the liberator will just cause the liberator player to move back a little and then deploy all liberators into AtG mode and annihilate everything.
That's not true. If there're nothing else but liberators alone, mass stalkers/hydras/marines can easily shoot them down. Don't forget that in AG mode liberator attacks SINGLE target within an area one at a time. Without any other supporting forces, even a lot of liberators covering a huge area in AG mode can not deal with mass anti-air forces.
This is one of the great issues with liberators being FLYING units however. They can use the terrain to make flanking difficult if not impossible. Mass stalkers would be pretty terrible, worse than anything else in fact, at cutting down a mass liberator fleet since stalkers over kill and would die to 2 shots from a liberator.
Mass marines only have range 4, which means it would take a huge positional blunder for the liberator player to expose the liberator fleet. Not only that, but terrans can use PF's to create an unassailable position which the libs can be positioned over.
Don't forget, you can't medivac drop / overlord drop onto a lib position due to their overwhelming AOE, so you've be stimming marines in without support to try and close the distance.
Hydras are perhaps the strongest of the ground to air units when it comes to dealing with mass libs, assuming the range and speed upgrades are researched, but with them being 1 shot I think 30 deployed libs would utter destroy them before they could deal any meaningful damage to the terran.
Nonetheless liberator is a SIEGE unit. It doesn't move when deployed, therefore there's little room for mistakes. The lack of mobility is a huge weakness. Deployed at a bad position or isolated from the others, it gets killed. Like siege tank, it's more about area control than frontal engagement. Since deployment takes time, the solution is to catch them by surprise when they're NOT deployed. If they're already deployed, at least you can run out their target areas, not running into them to die. It shouldn't be very hard to do with blinking stalkers or fast-moving hydras. In case of TvT, just pop out vikings in response. Nonetheless, neither its AA splash damage nor the AG mode matters if the liberators are in low number. Only does it pose a big threat when it's massed.
ive been watching this on streams it seems to be the way that the terran gets 3 per the zergs bases flies near edge if they can and just wipe mineral lines . . gg, everything what does near them gets killed and forces you into air. A counter for this is super cheap over lord speed 25/25 let me know they have gone disruptor so i can get air in quicker than just blind throwing down spire
Normally with an AA unit you can counter them by switching heavily into ground units, like when a zerg over makes corruptors. Liberators do not suffer from this. There is no punishement for over making the unit, and mass switches into say stalkers, hydras or marines in an effort to punish the liberator will just cause the liberator player to move back a little and then deploy all liberators into AtG mode and annihilate everything.
That's not true. If there're nothing else but liberators alone, mass stalkers/hydras/marines can easily shoot them down. Don't forget that in AG mode liberator attacks SINGLE target within an area one at a time. Without any other supporting forces, even a lot of liberators covering a huge area in AG mode can not deal with mass anti-air forces.
This is one of the great issues with liberators being FLYING units however. They can use the terrain to make flanking difficult if not impossible. Mass stalkers would be pretty terrible, worse than anything else in fact, at cutting down a mass liberator fleet since stalkers over kill and would die to 2 shots from a liberator.
Mass marines only have range 4, which means it would take a huge positional blunder for the liberator player to expose the liberator fleet. Not only that, but terrans can use PF's to create an unassailable position which the libs can be positioned over.
Don't forget, you can't medivac drop / overlord drop onto a lib position due to their overwhelming AOE, so you've be stimming marines in without support to try and close the distance.
Hydras are perhaps the strongest of the ground to air units when it comes to dealing with mass libs, assuming the range and speed upgrades are researched, but with them being 1 shot I think 30 deployed libs would utter destroy them before they could deal any meaningful damage to the terran.
Nonetheless liberator is a SIEGE unit. It doesn't move when deployed, therefore there's little room for mistakes. The lack of mobility is a huge weakness. Deployed at a bad position or isolated from the others, it gets killed. Like siege tank, it's more about area control than frontal engagement. Since deployment takes time, the solution is to catch them by surprise when they're NOT deployed. If they're already deployed, at least you can run out their target areas, not running into them to die. It shouldn't be very hard to do with blinking stalkers or fast-moving hydras. In case of TvT, just pop out vikings in response. Nonetheless, neither its AA splash damage nor the AG mode matters if the liberators are in low number. Only does it pose a big threat when it's massed.
This whole thread was made because a certain rush utilizing 1-2 liberators is very powerful.
put me as the zerg in a ZVT where this happens, with a standard game where I haven't already lost due to other circumstances, and I'll absolutely crush that lib massing player. Newsflash, the lib is easily flanked and ground units are supposed to be its counter. It's not a primary attack unit, and sucks in that role. It's a ZONE CONTROL unit, just like the lurker.
FOr zerg, I don't think there is any other option than massive parasite bombs to be honest, if the game goes to that stage, no ground units are going to do the job,
Anyway, I will wait to have the opinion of professionals players before drawing any conclusion, none of us here (except Nerchio) plays at a high level, so we should be careful. Sure the LIberator looks extremely strong, but same is true for lurkers, the new Carriers, ovie drops... etc so the overall games might be balanced. It is also a question of metagames, right now it is wild so it's hard to draw any conclusion, maybe this 2 base liberator/hellbat wll be in the future not possible because it'll be prevented by the possibility of some agressive build like OL drop builds for example.
I re-read a bunch of posts in this thread and there's way too many people that just do not understand the counters to liberator (spore/spine, corruptors, moving out of the huge circle lol).
Even magic boxed mutas can counter liberators, just like they do versus thors.
Oh, also ravagers are a really good counter to liberators as well because you can use the skill shot on the liberator while it's stationary and if you forced it to move you probably just stopped that push.
I might be in the minority, but I wouldn't mind the unit being removed entirely in favor of a better siege tank. As pretty much everyone has said, it steps all over the siege tank. More, in fact, than the HERC overlapped with the Hellbat.
put me as the zerg in a ZVT where this happens, with a standard game where I haven't already lost due to other circumstances, and I'll absolutely crush that lib massing player. Newsflash, the lib is easily flanked and ground units are supposed to be its counter. It's not a primary attack unit, and sucks in that role. It's a ZONE CONTROL unit, just like the lurker.
Sure the LIberator looks extremely strong, but same is true for lurkers, the new Carriers, ovie drops... etc so the overall games might be balanced.
I don't like that logic. If each race has a broken strat, it will probably even out, but will the game be interesting ? Nothing should be too extremely strong, and I think the liberator stats are just too high for the type of unit that it is.
put me as the zerg in a ZVT where this happens, with a standard game where I haven't already lost due to other circumstances, and I'll absolutely crush that lib massing player. Newsflash, the lib is easily flanked and ground units are supposed to be its counter. It's not a primary attack unit, and sucks in that role. It's a ZONE CONTROL unit, just like the lurker.
Sure the LIberator looks extremely strong, but same is true for lurkers, the new Carriers, ovie drops... etc so the overall games might be balanced.
I don't like that logic. If each race has a broken strat, it will probably even out, but will the game be interesting ? Nothing should be too extremely strong, and I think the liberator stats are just too high for the type of unit that it is.
I also think that the liberator's stats might be too high right now, but as long as it's only based on my games and of "low" (with respect the pro) level players, I am not sure of it nor how it should be changed, so I genuinely think we should keep the liberator as it is, at least for a longer moment to see how players adapt to it and exploit its flaws (if the unit has such).
And I am not saying that everyone should have a broken strategy but having a game balanced from the top (i.e. every race has very strong, not extremely but still, strong units), isn't it how BW was balanced around, and what is regularly requested from the community for SC2?
And I am not saying that everyone should have a broken strategy but having a game balanced from the top (i.e. every race has very strong, not extremely but still, strong units), isn't it how BW was balanced around, and what is regularly requested from the community for SC2?
Kinda but I don't agree that was why it worked. I think you can recreate some design of the OP units and make them less strong while putting them into the Sc2-environment.
The disadvantage with the BW approach is that it reduces diversity because the race bascially becomes balanced around being forced to use 1-2 key units.
put me as the zerg in a ZVT where this happens, with a standard game where I haven't already lost due to other circumstances, and I'll absolutely crush that lib massing player. Newsflash, the lib is easily flanked and ground units are supposed to be its counter. It's not a primary attack unit, and sucks in that role. It's a ZONE CONTROL unit, just like the lurker.
Sure the LIberator looks extremely strong, but same is true for lurkers, the new Carriers, ovie drops... etc so the overall games might be balanced.
I don't like that logic. If each race has a broken strat, it will probably even out, but will the game be interesting ? Nothing should be too extremely strong, and I think the liberator stats are just too high for the type of unit that it is.
I also think that the liberator's stats might be too high right now, but as long as it's only based on my games and of "low" (with respect the pro) level players, I am not sure of it nor how it should be changed, so I genuinely think we should keep the liberator as it is, at least for a longer moment to see how players adapt to it and exploit its flaws (if the unit has such).
And I am not saying that everyone should have a broken strategy but having a game balanced from the top (i.e. every race has very strong, not extremely but still, strong units), isn't it how BW was balanced around, and what is regularly requested from the community for SC2?
I think that approach is bound to fail in an SC2 environment that is far less mechanically demanding. I've always thought SC2 needs to be balanced from the core.
On July 23 2015 18:55 avilo wrote: I re-read a bunch of posts in this thread and there's way too many people that just do not understand the counters to liberator (spore/spine, corruptors, moving out of the huge circle lol).
Even magic boxed mutas can counter liberators, just like they do versus thors.
Oh, also ravagers are a really good counter to liberators as well because you can use the skill shot on the liberator while it's stationary and if you forced it to move you probably just stopped that push.
Just dont, you know what you said on stream... IMBA was the word. And you know it
put me as the zerg in a ZVT where this happens, with a standard game where I haven't already lost due to other circumstances, and I'll absolutely crush that lib massing player. Newsflash, the lib is easily flanked and ground units are supposed to be its counter. It's not a primary attack unit, and sucks in that role. It's a ZONE CONTROL unit, just like the lurker.
Sure the LIberator looks extremely strong, but same is true for lurkers, the new Carriers, ovie drops... etc so the overall games might be balanced.
I don't like that logic. If each race has a broken strat, it will probably even out, but will the game be interesting ? Nothing should be too extremely strong, and I think the liberator stats are just too high for the type of unit that it is.
I also think that the liberator's stats might be too high right now, but as long as it's only based on my games and of "low" (with respect the pro) level players, I am not sure of it nor how it should be changed, so I genuinely think we should keep the liberator as it is, at least for a longer moment to see how players adapt to it and exploit its flaws (if the unit has such).
And I am not saying that everyone should have a broken strategy but having a game balanced from the top (i.e. every race has very strong, not extremely but still, strong units), isn't it how BW was balanced around, and what is regularly requested from the community for SC2?
I think that approach is bound to fail in an SC2 environment that is far less mechanically demanding. I've always thought SC2 needs to be balanced from the core.
Maybe it's true, I really don't know to be honest, it's nice that they are willing to test it at least, so we will see how it work.
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.
Okay, so we've establish your disposition, lol. But we've all got a little arsehole in us, so I'll let that slide. But, I made some clear points. So, let's see if you address them ...
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 ...
I think I will explain my reasoning. The liberator doesn't require a ridiculous amount of micro to use with it's aa it's very static there's not many more tricks to it than A move or to focus fire. The ATG requires no movement or micro tricks, it just requires the person to set it up in a optimal position. Spores do not shut down the liberator as a harass based unit, on all of the maps there's a spot that the Liberator can hit one of your 3 bases mineral lines without being affected by a sporecrawler. Uprooting and rooting a spore takes 7 seconds I don't have the precise switching time for the liberator but it is substantially below that number spores are only effective in that manner in the lategame when you have more creep space to maneuver. It's a totally misguided post.
Okay, perhaps the context and essence of my post was unclear. Was it not obvious that I was primarily talking about the Air-to-Ground (ATG) mode? And also, specifically in a harass role? *shrugs* I don't think anyone is arguing that the Air-to-Air a-move requires much micro. Can we move on?
You then make this claim. Lulz. I'm almost tempted to just assume that this is not a serious rebuttal ... The lib cannot ATG and move. So, you have to move, and then activate ATG. That's micro. The ATG has an animation tell, and a huge warning marker for the opponent. Spores cannot be targeted, so are free to build and move. So, you roll in, activate these modes, maybe get a couple shots off, then you have to re-position to avoid the spore or the queen. Select > deactivate > move > reactivate target > observe what's happening > repeat. Now, imagine there is more than one?
You then make this claim. Oh, really? Is that a fact? Lulz. Are you really arguing that spores and queens do not counter the Lib harass? They do. I don't know how long it takes to deactivate ATG, move, activate ATG, and then fire one shot from the Lib, but I'm pretty sure the window when compared to an attended spore is extremely small (requiring constant micro, and basically meaning the harass will not do a lot of damage).
Can we move on?
You claim my post is "totally misguided".
The drive of my post: Lib requires lots of micro. It has an activated mode for each unit, lol, that changes attack and movement. Anyone really want to disagree that this does not constitute micro? As a harass unit the Lib requires a lot of micro, and a prepared Zerg with queens and spores will not take massive damage. This is totally misguided? I think I've said enough to at least reasonably push back on your rebuttal.
I'm open to being wrong, I just don't think I am in this argument. Maybe I am, though, Maybe someone can post the sweet spot, on all three bases, on all the maps, where even with spores and queens you cannot defend a Lib harass. *shrugs*
Allow me to elaborate on preparedness: if a Lib harass opener shows up, unscouted (which is difficult because of lings and overlords), and you do not have spores, you're going to lose the mining time it takes to build a spore, and maybe a queen if you try to fight the Lib instead of building a spore.
On July 23 2015 18:55 avilo wrote: I re-read a bunch of posts in this thread and there's way too many people that just do not understand the counters to liberator (spore/spine, corruptors, moving out of the huge circle lol).
Even magic boxed mutas can counter liberators, just like they do versus thors.
Oh, also ravagers are a really good counter to liberators as well because you can use the skill shot on the liberator while it's stationary and if you forced it to move you probably just stopped that push.
Wow, Mutas that Zerg players have to spend 1000+ minerals and 1000+ gas can beat other flying units if you use micro? That sounds like an amazing deal for Zergs! Any army can beat another army depending on the resources and micro you spend on that army
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.
Okay, so we've establish your disposition, lol. But we've all got a little arsehole in us, so I'll let that slide. But, I made some clear points. So, let's see if you address them ...
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 ...
I think I will explain my reasoning. The liberator doesn't require a ridiculous amount of micro to use with it's aa it's very static there's not many more tricks to it than A move or to focus fire. The ATG requires no movement or micro tricks, it just requires the person to set it up in a optimal position. Spores do not shut down the liberator as a harass based unit, on all of the maps there's a spot that the Liberator can hit one of your 3 bases mineral lines without being affected by a sporecrawler. Uprooting and rooting a spore takes 7 seconds I don't have the precise switching time for the liberator but it is substantially below that number spores are only effective in that manner in the lategame when you have more creep space to maneuver. It's a totally misguided post.
Okay, perhaps the context and essence of my post was unclear. Was it not obvious that I was primarily talking about the Air-to-Ground (ATG) mode? And also, specifically in a harass role? *shrugs* I don't think anyone is arguing that the Air-to-Air a-move requires much micro. Can we move on?
You then make this claim. Lulz. I'm almost tempted to just assume that this is not a serious rebuttal ... The lib cannot ATG and move. So, you have to move, and then activate ATG. That's micro. The ATG has an animation tell, and a huge warning marker for the opponent. Spores cannot be targeted, so are free to build and move. So, you roll in, activate these modes, maybe get a couple shots off, then you have to re-position to avoid the spore or the queen. Select > deactivate > move > reactivate target > observe what's happening > repeat. Now, imagine there is more than one?
You then make this claim. Oh, really? Is that a fact? Lulz. Are you really arguing that spores and queens do not counter the Lib harass? They do. I don't know how long it takes to deactivate ATG, move, activate ATG, and then fire one shot from the Lib, but I'm pretty sure the window when compared to an attended spore is extremely small (requiring constant micro, and basically meaning the harass will not do a lot of damage).
Can we move on?
You claim my post is "totally misguided".
The drive of my post: Lib requires lots of micro. It has an activated mode for each unit, lol, that changes attack and movement. Anyone really want to disagree that this does not constitute micro? As a harass unit the Lib requires a lot of micro, and a prepared Zerg with queens and spores will not take massive damage. This is totally misguided? I think I've said enough to at least reasonably push back on your rebuttal.
I'm open to being wrong, I just don't think I am in this argument. Maybe I am, though, Maybe someone can post the sweet spot, on all three bases, on all the maps, where even with spores and queens you cannot defend a Lib harass. *shrugs*
Allow me to elaborate on preparedness: if a Lib harass opener shows up, unscouted (which is difficult because of lings and overlords), and you do not have spores, you're going to lose the mining time it takes to build a spore, and maybe a queen if you try to fight the Lib instead of building a spore.
What league are you in HOTS and in LOTV, I'm currently writing a massive response for all the broken spots for liberators vs zerg so I will rebut your points in more detail with the general information in that, but I will say I still hold my opinion that you have no clue what you're talking about in regards to the strength of the liberator. The fact that you think 1 spore and 1 queen can stop 1 liberator is a joke.
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.
Okay, so we've establish your disposition, lol. But we've all got a little arsehole in us, so I'll let that slide. But, I made some clear points. So, let's see if you address them ...
On July 23 2015 06:28 Ovid wrote: *snip!*
Since this is directed at me for this guys post
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 ...
I think I will explain my reasoning. The liberator doesn't require a ridiculous amount of micro to use with it's aa it's very static there's not many more tricks to it than A move or to focus fire. The ATG requires no movement or micro tricks, it just requires the person to set it up in a optimal position. Spores do not shut down the liberator as a harass based unit, on all of the maps there's a spot that the Liberator can hit one of your 3 bases mineral lines without being affected by a sporecrawler. Uprooting and rooting a spore takes 7 seconds I don't have the precise switching time for the liberator but it is substantially below that number spores are only effective in that manner in the lategame when you have more creep space to maneuver. It's a totally misguided post.
Okay, perhaps the context and essence of my post was unclear. Was it not obvious that I was primarily talking about the Air-to-Ground (ATG) mode? And also, specifically in a harass role? *shrugs* I don't think anyone is arguing that the Air-to-Air a-move requires much micro. Can we move on?
You then make this claim. Lulz. I'm almost tempted to just assume that this is not a serious rebuttal ... The lib cannot ATG and move. So, you have to move, and then activate ATG. That's micro. The ATG has an animation tell, and a huge warning marker for the opponent. Spores cannot be targeted, so are free to build and move. So, you roll in, activate these modes, maybe get a couple shots off, then you have to re-position to avoid the spore or the queen. Select > deactivate > move > reactivate target > observe what's happening > repeat. Now, imagine there is more than one?
You then make this claim. Oh, really? Is that a fact? Lulz. Are you really arguing that spores and queens do not counter the Lib harass? They do. I don't know how long it takes to deactivate ATG, move, activate ATG, and then fire one shot from the Lib, but I'm pretty sure the window when compared to an attended spore is extremely small (requiring constant micro, and basically meaning the harass will not do a lot of damage).
Can we move on?
You claim my post is "totally misguided".
The drive of my post: Lib requires lots of micro. It has an activated mode for each unit, lol, that changes attack and movement. Anyone really want to disagree that this does not constitute micro? As a harass unit the Lib requires a lot of micro, and a prepared Zerg with queens and spores will not take massive damage. This is totally misguided? I think I've said enough to at least reasonably push back on your rebuttal.
I'm open to being wrong, I just don't think I am in this argument. Maybe I am, though, Maybe someone can post the sweet spot, on all three bases, on all the maps, where even with spores and queens you cannot defend a Lib harass. *shrugs*
Allow me to elaborate on preparedness: if a Lib harass opener shows up, unscouted (which is difficult because of lings and overlords), and you do not have spores, you're going to lose the mining time it takes to build a spore, and maybe a queen if you try to fight the Lib instead of building a spore.
What league are you in HOTS and in LOTV, I'm currently writing a massive response for all the broken spots for liberators vs zerg so I will rebut your points in more detail with the general information in that, but I will say I still hold my opinion that you have no clue what you're talking about in regards to the strength of the liberator. The fact that you think 1 spore and 1 queen can stop 1 liberator is a joke.
A spore crawler is a ridiculously good counter to the liberator. So are queens, unless you literally walk into liberator range, you can easily dance around the liberator in early game lol. Most early liberator rushes with hellions are off of 1 CC or 2 CC in which the Terran just got their 2nd CC mining, so there is an investment the Terran is putting to try to do damage to you. It's holdable, and depending on how much the T loses can put them way behind, or can put them ahead.
This is a list of spots that the liberator can stop mining to some capacity without a spore or a queen being able to attack them, the images use a turret to display the 7 range the black line is where the turret reaches to all of the images show untouchable places from 7 range GTA attacks (Queen and Spores) bear in mind stalkers have 6 range so I'm sure these spots are also effective there.
Terraform Main base isn't affected, nor is the natural below is a image of the central more exposed third Here is the other potential third Here is the range from the natural
Bridgehead You can only attack the third mineral line without being affected placing the ATG when there's a double layer is very imprecise since it jumps forward which is why I place the liberator to the side
Orbital Shipyard This is in that pocket natural
Dash and Terminal This is the natural The third behind your natural The forward third, it's not the one that's directly left from the natural the one that is infront of that one. Excuse the lack of the black line I couldn't see the missile turret range on the image but I tested it before I took the photo ingame by building a turret there and seeing if it could attack the liberator
Ruins of Seras This is your natural This is the further away third not the one tucked just forward from the natural/mainbase.
Moonlight Madness This map truly is madness liberators are insanely broken on this map, here's your pocket natural/third The other natural that most people take first The potential third that is in a perfect line with your main and the above natural
Lerilak Crest The only map with 0 mineral line harass points this is mainly due to the large amount of space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger
Conclusion The only way to effectively deal with the early liberators requires you to specifically counter them and even then it's impossible to hard counter the build since getting a spire out at a fast enough time puts you behind in economy as already discussed in this thread, this leaves you with a Ravager opener, unmorphing a liberator takes 1 second and the bile take 2.5 seconds to land meaning someone who is on top of their control can avoid any damage and re-position in a fast enough time to take more shots. It requires 3 corrosive bile to destroy a liberator. It takes roughly 1min and 8 seconds for you to prepare ravagers, and taking my timings from the QXC archon game the first liberator can arrive at 4:50, which means you need to be making a roach warren at 3:42 at the latest, the first time you can confirm the build with 100% certainty is at 3:40 when the armory is placed and when you see no techlab on the starport. Because if you assume it's a liberator off two gas and go for ravagers a hellbat banshee push will probably end up doing crippling damage. The timing window to react is so small that you have to be preparing before this build arrives. Sure you can stop this push, but you will be behind in economy in any method that is effective. A ravager build still isn't effective because for a lot of these spots for them to be in range of the liberator. So the only two builds that have the range for you to counter these spots are ineffective because they put you behind in economy. These spots aren't even essential since you can also siege up in open area for effective damage.
The best conclusion is to remove the liberator for a Valkyrie equivalent and to buff the siege tank for better zone control. Otherwise the fix will be to make everymap having a much larger space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger and constrains the map makers further.
Avilo: "Spores counter them!!! Queens are also ridiculously effective against them!"
Every non-T biased poster: "Uhhh no, Zerg actually doesnt have proper anti-air since liberators can out-range if placed in some positions, and even if you tech to Mutas, mass liberators shred mass mutas"
I don't see why you guys even bother replying to Avilo. He clearly has a Terran-based agenda
EDIT: Yes, thanks for the pictures. That should shut up the Terrans who are claiming spores are great against them.
This is a list of spots that the liberator can stop mining to some capacity without a spore or a queen being able to attack them, the images use a turret to display the 7 range the black line is where the turret reaches to all of the images show untouchable places from 7 range GTA attacks (Queen and Spores) bear in mind stalkers have 6 range so I'm sure these spots are also effective there.
Terraform Main base isn't affected, nor is the natural below is a image of the central more exposed third Here is the other potential third Here is the range from the natural
Bridgehead You can only attack the third mineral line without being affected placing the ATG when there's a double layer is very imprecise since it jumps forward which is why I place the liberator to the side
[u]Orbital Shipyard This is in that pocket natural
Dash and Terminal This is the natural The third behind your natural The forward third, it's not the one that's directly left from the natural the one that is infront of that one. Excuse the lack of the black line I couldn't see the missile turret range on the image but I tested it before I took the photo ingame by building a turret there and seeing if it could attack the liberator
Ruins of Seras This is your natural This is the further away third not the one tucked just forward from the natural/mainbase.
Moonlight Madness This map truly is madness liberators are insanely broken on this map, here's your pocket natural/third The other natural that most people take first The potential third that is in a perfect line with your main and the above natural
Lerilak Crest The only map with 0 mineral line harass points this is mainly due to the large amount of space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger
[u]Conclusion The only way to effectively deal with the early liberators requires you to specifically counter them and even then it's impossible to hard counter the build since getting a spire out at a fast enough time puts you behind in economy as already discussed in this thread, this leaves you with a Ravager opener, unmorphing a liberator takes 1 second and the bile take 2.5 seconds to land meaning someone who is on top of their control can avoid any damage and re-position in a fast enough time to take more shots. It requires 3 corrosive bile to destroy a liberator. It takes roughly 1min and 8 seconds for you to prepare ravagers, and taking my timings from the QXC archon game the first liberator can arrive at 4:50, which means you need to be making a roach warren at 3:42 at the latest, the first time you can confirm the build with 100% certainty is at 3:40 when the armory is placed and when you see no techlab on the starport. Because if you assume it's a liberator off two gas and go for ravagers a hellbat banshee push will probably end up doing crippling damage. The timing window to react is so small that you have to be preparing before this build arrives. Sure you can stop this push, but you will be behind in economy in any method that is effective. A ravager build still isn't effective because for a lot of these spots for them to be in range of the liberator. So the only two builds that have the range for you to counter these spots are ineffective because they put you behind in economy. These spots aren't even essential since you can also siege up in open area for effective damage.
The best conclusion is to remove the liberator for a Valkyrie equivalent and to buff the siege tank for better zone control. Otherwise the fix will be to make everymap having a much larger space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger and constrains the map makers further.
You do realize that both Zerg and Protoss have units that are capable of doing long range air to ground for a long time already (Broodlords, Tempest)? So far there has been no complaints about them being imba in LOTV. So what exactly is wrong that Terran gets the same kind of unit that the two other races already have? Hint: If you are losing to liberator harass (which btw requires very heavy investment down a specific tech path by terran), maybe you should make some air units such as mutas, or better yet, do counter attacks/timing attacks instead of greedily droning up to 70 workers.
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.
Okay, so we've establish your disposition, lol. But we've all got a little arsehole in us, so I'll let that slide. But, I made some clear points. So, let's see if you address them ...
On July 23 2015 06:28 Ovid wrote: *snip!*
Since this is directed at me for this guys post
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 ...
I think I will explain my reasoning. The liberator doesn't require a ridiculous amount of micro to use with it's aa it's very static there's not many more tricks to it than A move or to focus fire. The ATG requires no movement or micro tricks, it just requires the person to set it up in a optimal position. Spores do not shut down the liberator as a harass based unit, on all of the maps there's a spot that the Liberator can hit one of your 3 bases mineral lines without being affected by a sporecrawler. Uprooting and rooting a spore takes 7 seconds I don't have the precise switching time for the liberator but it is substantially below that number spores are only effective in that manner in the lategame when you have more creep space to maneuver. It's a totally misguided post.
Okay, perhaps the context and essence of my post was unclear. Was it not obvious that I was primarily talking about the Air-to-Ground (ATG) mode? And also, specifically in a harass role? *shrugs* I don't think anyone is arguing that the Air-to-Air a-move requires much micro. Can we move on?
You then make this claim. Lulz. I'm almost tempted to just assume that this is not a serious rebuttal ... The lib cannot ATG and move. So, you have to move, and then activate ATG. That's micro. The ATG has an animation tell, and a huge warning marker for the opponent. Spores cannot be targeted, so are free to build and move. So, you roll in, activate these modes, maybe get a couple shots off, then you have to re-position to avoid the spore or the queen. Select > deactivate > move > reactivate target > observe what's happening > repeat. Now, imagine there is more than one?
You then make this claim. Oh, really? Is that a fact? Lulz. Are you really arguing that spores and queens do not counter the Lib harass? They do. I don't know how long it takes to deactivate ATG, move, activate ATG, and then fire one shot from the Lib, but I'm pretty sure the window when compared to an attended spore is extremely small (requiring constant micro, and basically meaning the harass will not do a lot of damage).
Can we move on?
You claim my post is "totally misguided".
The drive of my post: Lib requires lots of micro. It has an activated mode for each unit, lol, that changes attack and movement. Anyone really want to disagree that this does not constitute micro? As a harass unit the Lib requires a lot of micro, and a prepared Zerg with queens and spores will not take massive damage. This is totally misguided? I think I've said enough to at least reasonably push back on your rebuttal.
I'm open to being wrong, I just don't think I am in this argument. Maybe I am, though, Maybe someone can post the sweet spot, on all three bases, on all the maps, where even with spores and queens you cannot defend a Lib harass. *shrugs*
Allow me to elaborate on preparedness: if a Lib harass opener shows up, unscouted (which is difficult because of lings and overlords), and you do not have spores, you're going to lose the mining time it takes to build a spore, and maybe a queen if you try to fight the Lib instead of building a spore.
What league are you in HOTS and in LOTV, I'm currently writing a massive response for all the broken spots for liberators vs zerg so I will rebut your points in more detail with the general information in that, but I will say I still hold my opinion that you have no clue what you're talking about in regards to the strength of the liberator. The fact that you think 1 spore and 1 queen can stop 1 liberator is a joke.
A spore crawler is a ridiculously good counter to the liberator. So are queens, unless you literally walk into liberator range, you can easily dance around the liberator in early game lol. Most early liberator rushes with hellions are off of 1 CC or 2 CC in which the Terran just got their 2nd CC mining, so there is an investment the Terran is putting to try to do damage to you. It's holdable, and depending on how much the T loses can put them way behind, or can put them ahead.
Please stop the BS you know its not... the circle is so big that if you put it on some ramps they cant really engage, hellbats can kill the spore clawer way faster. You know its IMBA you even said it on stream.
Not to mention that they can shoot from dead space to kill mineral lines without getting hit on some maps since they buffed the range by 1.
Its so disgusting seeing people defend this.... do they really think that getting some free wins at the start of the game is important instead of having a good game ?
This is a list of spots that the liberator can stop mining to some capacity without a spore or a queen being able to attack them, the images use a turret to display the 7 range the black line is where the turret reaches to all of the images show untouchable places from 7 range GTA attacks (Queen and Spores) bear in mind stalkers have 6 range so I'm sure these spots are also effective there.
Terraform Main base isn't affected, nor is the natural below is a image of the central more exposed third Here is the other potential third Here is the range from the natural
Bridgehead You can only attack the third mineral line without being affected placing the ATG when there's a double layer is very imprecise since it jumps forward which is why I place the liberator to the side
[u]Orbital Shipyard[u] This is in that pocket natural
Dash and Terminal This is the natural The third behind your natural The forward third, it's not the one that's directly left from the natural the one that is infront of that one. Excuse the lack of the black line I couldn't see the missile turret range on the image but I tested it before I took the photo ingame by building a turret there and seeing if it could attack the liberator
Ruins of Seras This is your natural This is the further away third not the one tucked just forward from the natural/mainbase.
Moonlight Madness This map truly is madness liberators are insanely broken on this map, here's your pocket natural/third The other natural that most people take first The potential third that is in a perfect line with your main and the above natural
Lerilak Crest The only map with 0 mineral line harass points this is mainly due to the large amount of space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger
Conclusion The only way to effectively deal with the early liberators requires you to specifically counter them and even then it's impossible to hard counter the build since getting a spire out at a fast enough time puts you behind in economy as already discussed in this thread, this leaves you with a Ravager opener, unmorphing a liberator takes 1 second and the bile take 2.5 seconds to land meaning someone who is on top of their control can avoid any damage and re-position in a fast enough time to take more shots. It requires 3 corrosive bile to destroy a liberator. It takes roughly 1min and 8 seconds for you to prepare ravagers, and taking my timings from the QXC archon game the first liberator can arrive at 4:50, which means you need to be making a roach warren at 3:42 at the latest, the first time you can confirm the build with 100% certainty is at 3:40 when the armory is placed and when you see no techlab on the starport. Because if you assume it's a liberator off two gas and go for ravagers a hellbat banshee push will probably end up doing crippling damage. The timing window to react is so small that you have to be preparing before this build arrives. Sure you can stop this push, but you will be behind in economy in any method that is effective. A ravager build still isn't effective because for a lot of these spots for them to be in range of the liberator. So the only two builds that have the range for you to counter these spots are ineffective because they put you behind in economy. These spots aren't even essential since you can also siege up in open area for effective damage.
The best conclusion is to remove the liberator for a Valkyrie equivalent and to buff the siege tank for better zone control. Otherwise the fix will be to make everymap having a much larger space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger and constrains the map makers further.
You do realize that both Zerg and Protoss have units that are capable of doing long range air to ground for a long time already (Broodlords, Tempest)? So far there has been no complaints about them being imba in LOTV. So what exactly is wrong that Terran gets the same kind of unit that the two other races already have? Hint: If you are losing to liberators, maybe you should make some air units such as mutas, or better yet, do counter attacks/timing attacks instead of greedily droning up to 70 workers.
Right cuz you have that at 5 min in the game... should have made some ultras againts hellbats to.
2 base muta stops that but your dead to the next bio push, 2 base terran > 2 base zerg ...unless the terran is really bad
This is a list of spots that the liberator can stop mining to some capacity without a spore or a queen being able to attack them, the images use a turret to display the 7 range the black line is where the turret reaches to all of the images show untouchable places from 7 range GTA attacks (Queen and Spores) bear in mind stalkers have 6 range so I'm sure these spots are also effective there.
Terraform Main base isn't affected, nor is the natural below is a image of the central more exposed third Here is the other potential third Here is the range from the natural
Bridgehead You can only attack the third mineral line without being affected placing the ATG when there's a double layer is very imprecise since it jumps forward which is why I place the liberator to the side
[u]Orbital Shipyard[u] This is in that pocket natural
Dash and Terminal This is the natural The third behind your natural The forward third, it's not the one that's directly left from the natural the one that is infront of that one. Excuse the lack of the black line I couldn't see the missile turret range on the image but I tested it before I took the photo ingame by building a turret there and seeing if it could attack the liberator
Ruins of Seras This is your natural This is the further away third not the one tucked just forward from the natural/mainbase.
Moonlight Madness This map truly is madness liberators are insanely broken on this map, here's your pocket natural/third The other natural that most people take first The potential third that is in a perfect line with your main and the above natural
Lerilak Crest The only map with 0 mineral line harass points this is mainly due to the large amount of space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger
Conclusion The only way to effectively deal with the early liberators requires you to specifically counter them and even then it's impossible to hard counter the build since getting a spire out at a fast enough time puts you behind in economy as already discussed in this thread, this leaves you with a Ravager opener, unmorphing a liberator takes 1 second and the bile take 2.5 seconds to land meaning someone who is on top of their control can avoid any damage and re-position in a fast enough time to take more shots. It requires 3 corrosive bile to destroy a liberator. It takes roughly 1min and 8 seconds for you to prepare ravagers, and taking my timings from the QXC archon game the first liberator can arrive at 4:50, which means you need to be making a roach warren at 3:42 at the latest, the first time you can confirm the build with 100% certainty is at 3:40 when the armory is placed and when you see no techlab on the starport. Because if you assume it's a liberator off two gas and go for ravagers a hellbat banshee push will probably end up doing crippling damage. The timing window to react is so small that you have to be preparing before this build arrives. Sure you can stop this push, but you will be behind in economy in any method that is effective. A ravager build still isn't effective because for a lot of these spots for them to be in range of the liberator. So the only two builds that have the range for you to counter these spots are ineffective because they put you behind in economy. These spots aren't even essential since you can also siege up in open area for effective damage.
The best conclusion is to remove the liberator for a Valkyrie equivalent and to buff the siege tank for better zone control. Otherwise the fix will be to make everymap having a much larger space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger and constrains the map makers further.
You do realize that both Zerg and Protoss have units that are capable of doing long range air to ground for a long time already (Broodlords, Tempest)? So far there has been no complaints about them being imba in LOTV. So what exactly is wrong that Terran gets the same kind of unit that the two other races already have? Hint: If you are losing to liberators, maybe you should make some air units such as mutas, or better yet, do counter attacks/timing attacks instead of greedily droning up to 70 workers.
Are you mentally retarded? Broodlords are extreme lategame and even with Tempest rushes they do so little DPS that even scouting them just as they attack you should give you enough time to respond.
edit - thanks for the kind words on the images, I think it really helps show where we're coming from.
This is a list of spots that the liberator can stop mining to some capacity without a spore or a queen being able to attack them, the images use a turret to display the 7 range the black line is where the turret reaches to all of the images show untouchable places from 7 range GTA attacks (Queen and Spores) bear in mind stalkers have 6 range so I'm sure these spots are also effective there.
Terraform Main base isn't affected, nor is the natural below is a image of the central more exposed third Here is the other potential third Here is the range from the natural
Bridgehead You can only attack the third mineral line without being affected placing the ATG when there's a double layer is very imprecise since it jumps forward which is why I place the liberator to the side
[u]Orbital Shipyard[u] This is in that pocket natural
Dash and Terminal This is the natural The third behind your natural The forward third, it's not the one that's directly left from the natural the one that is infront of that one. Excuse the lack of the black line I couldn't see the missile turret range on the image but I tested it before I took the photo ingame by building a turret there and seeing if it could attack the liberator
Ruins of Seras This is your natural This is the further away third not the one tucked just forward from the natural/mainbase.
Moonlight Madness This map truly is madness liberators are insanely broken on this map, here's your pocket natural/third The other natural that most people take first The potential third that is in a perfect line with your main and the above natural
Lerilak Crest The only map with 0 mineral line harass points this is mainly due to the large amount of space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger
Conclusion The only way to effectively deal with the early liberators requires you to specifically counter them and even then it's impossible to hard counter the build since getting a spire out at a fast enough time puts you behind in economy as already discussed in this thread, this leaves you with a Ravager opener, unmorphing a liberator takes 1 second and the bile take 2.5 seconds to land meaning someone who is on top of their control can avoid any damage and re-position in a fast enough time to take more shots. It requires 3 corrosive bile to destroy a liberator. It takes roughly 1min and 8 seconds for you to prepare ravagers, and taking my timings from the QXC archon game the first liberator can arrive at 4:50, which means you need to be making a roach warren at 3:42 at the latest, the first time you can confirm the build with 100% certainty is at 3:40 when the armory is placed and when you see no techlab on the starport. Because if you assume it's a liberator off two gas and go for ravagers a hellbat banshee push will probably end up doing crippling damage. The timing window to react is so small that you have to be preparing before this build arrives. Sure you can stop this push, but you will be behind in economy in any method that is effective. A ravager build still isn't effective because for a lot of these spots for them to be in range of the liberator. So the only two builds that have the range for you to counter these spots are ineffective because they put you behind in economy. These spots aren't even essential since you can also siege up in open area for effective damage.
The best conclusion is to remove the liberator for a Valkyrie equivalent and to buff the siege tank for better zone control. Otherwise the fix will be to make everymap having a much larger space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger and constrains the map makers further.
You do realize that both Zerg and Protoss have units that are capable of doing long range air to ground for a long time already (Broodlords, Tempest)? So far there has been no complaints about them being imba in LOTV. So what exactly is wrong that Terran gets the same kind of unit that the two other races already have? Hint: If you are losing to liberators, maybe you should make some air units such as mutas, or better yet, do counter attacks/timing attacks instead of greedily droning up to 70 workers.
You do realize that those units cannot sit there at 5mins in the game before it is theoretically possible to field an AtA counter? And those units aren't amazing AtA units themselves that actually punish you for you trying to punish that play.
The problem with liberators is how early they can hit and dominate a mineral line when the other player cannot realistically have air units if he isn't trying to directly counter them.
Even then, I thought colossi forcing out vikings was a bad thing, and now liberators forcing air (most T players that go bio against me tell me to get air units to force the liberators to unsiege) would be a good thing ? Please. The tech requirements and timings on such strong zone control should be higher.
EDIT : big thanks to Ovid for that detailed research, I hope this opens some eyes. That kind of broken spots makes you wonder if Blizzard actually tests their stuff before patching it.
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.
Okay, so we've establish your disposition, lol. But we've all got a little arsehole in us, so I'll let that slide. But, I made some clear points. So, let's see if you address them ...
On July 23 2015 06:28 Ovid wrote: *snip!*
Since this is directed at me for this guys post
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 ...
I think I will explain my reasoning. The liberator doesn't require a ridiculous amount of micro to use with it's aa it's very static there's not many more tricks to it than A move or to focus fire. The ATG requires no movement or micro tricks, it just requires the person to set it up in a optimal position. Spores do not shut down the liberator as a harass based unit, on all of the maps there's a spot that the Liberator can hit one of your 3 bases mineral lines without being affected by a sporecrawler. Uprooting and rooting a spore takes 7 seconds I don't have the precise switching time for the liberator but it is substantially below that number spores are only effective in that manner in the lategame when you have more creep space to maneuver. It's a totally misguided post.
Okay, perhaps the context and essence of my post was unclear. Was it not obvious that I was primarily talking about the Air-to-Ground (ATG) mode? And also, specifically in a harass role? *shrugs* I don't think anyone is arguing that the Air-to-Air a-move requires much micro. Can we move on?
You then make this claim. Lulz. I'm almost tempted to just assume that this is not a serious rebuttal ... The lib cannot ATG and move. So, you have to move, and then activate ATG. That's micro. The ATG has an animation tell, and a huge warning marker for the opponent. Spores cannot be targeted, so are free to build and move. So, you roll in, activate these modes, maybe get a couple shots off, then you have to re-position to avoid the spore or the queen. Select > deactivate > move > reactivate target > observe what's happening > repeat. Now, imagine there is more than one?
You then make this claim. Oh, really? Is that a fact? Lulz. Are you really arguing that spores and queens do not counter the Lib harass? They do. I don't know how long it takes to deactivate ATG, move, activate ATG, and then fire one shot from the Lib, but I'm pretty sure the window when compared to an attended spore is extremely small (requiring constant micro, and basically meaning the harass will not do a lot of damage).
Can we move on?
You claim my post is "totally misguided".
The drive of my post: Lib requires lots of micro. It has an activated mode for each unit, lol, that changes attack and movement. Anyone really want to disagree that this does not constitute micro? As a harass unit the Lib requires a lot of micro, and a prepared Zerg with queens and spores will not take massive damage. This is totally misguided? I think I've said enough to at least reasonably push back on your rebuttal.
I'm open to being wrong, I just don't think I am in this argument. Maybe I am, though, Maybe someone can post the sweet spot, on all three bases, on all the maps, where even with spores and queens you cannot defend a Lib harass. *shrugs*
Allow me to elaborate on preparedness: if a Lib harass opener shows up, unscouted (which is difficult because of lings and overlords), and you do not have spores, you're going to lose the mining time it takes to build a spore, and maybe a queen if you try to fight the Lib instead of building a spore.
What league are you in HOTS and in LOTV, I'm currently writing a massive response for all the broken spots for liberators vs zerg so I will rebut your points in more detail with the general information in that, but I will say I still hold my opinion that you have no clue what you're talking about in regards to the strength of the liberator. The fact that you think 1 spore and 1 queen can stop 1 liberator is a joke.
A spore crawler is a ridiculously good counter to the liberator. So are queens, unless you literally walk into liberator range, you can easily dance around the liberator in early game lol. Most early liberator rushes with hellions are off of 1 CC or 2 CC in which the Terran just got their 2nd CC mining, so there is an investment the Terran is putting to try to do damage to you. It's holdable, and depending on how much the T loses can put them way behind, or can put them ahead.
Exactly, all harass, depending on the skill of the attacker and preparation of the defender, can either succeed wildly, fail spectacularly, or somewhere in between. If the player dont build spores when the cloaked banshee comes and loses 30 drones, who is at the fault, the game or the player? If the player dont make turrets when the dts come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If the player does not have any stargates ready when the mutas come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If you dont scout that your opponent is going for a liberator build and prepare spores in time, you deserve to lose.
On July 24 2015 06:08 [PkF] Wire wrote: The problem with liberators is how early they can hit and dominate a mineral line when the other player cannot realistically have air units if he isn't trying to directly counter them.
Even then, I thought colossi forcing out vikings was a bad thing, and now liberators forcing air (most T players that go bio against me tell me to get air units to force the liberators to unsiege) would be a good thing ? Please. The tech requirements and timings on such strong zone control should be higher.
EDIT : big thanks to Ovid for that detailed research, I hope this opens some eyes. That kind of broken spots makes you wonder if Blizzard actually tests their stuff before patching it.
These so called "broken spots" are just as easily used by Broodlords and Tempests. In fact they existed in maps dating all the way back to Broodwar. Did you know that a common tactic for Zerg in Broodwar ZvT is to morph mutas into guardians (equivalent to SC2's broodlords) behind the terran's natural and harass the mineral line in positions unreachable by marines? According to the logic of certain posters, this would so imba that Zerg would be unbeatable!
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.
Okay, so we've establish your disposition, lol. But we've all got a little arsehole in us, so I'll let that slide. But, I made some clear points. So, let's see if you address them ...
On July 23 2015 06:28 Ovid wrote: *snip!*
Since this is directed at me for this guys post
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 ...
I think I will explain my reasoning. The liberator doesn't require a ridiculous amount of micro to use with it's aa it's very static there's not many more tricks to it than A move or to focus fire. The ATG requires no movement or micro tricks, it just requires the person to set it up in a optimal position. Spores do not shut down the liberator as a harass based unit, on all of the maps there's a spot that the Liberator can hit one of your 3 bases mineral lines without being affected by a sporecrawler. Uprooting and rooting a spore takes 7 seconds I don't have the precise switching time for the liberator but it is substantially below that number spores are only effective in that manner in the lategame when you have more creep space to maneuver. It's a totally misguided post.
Okay, perhaps the context and essence of my post was unclear. Was it not obvious that I was primarily talking about the Air-to-Ground (ATG) mode? And also, specifically in a harass role? *shrugs* I don't think anyone is arguing that the Air-to-Air a-move requires much micro. Can we move on?
You then make this claim. Lulz. I'm almost tempted to just assume that this is not a serious rebuttal ... The lib cannot ATG and move. So, you have to move, and then activate ATG. That's micro. The ATG has an animation tell, and a huge warning marker for the opponent. Spores cannot be targeted, so are free to build and move. So, you roll in, activate these modes, maybe get a couple shots off, then you have to re-position to avoid the spore or the queen. Select > deactivate > move > reactivate target > observe what's happening > repeat. Now, imagine there is more than one?
You then make this claim. Oh, really? Is that a fact? Lulz. Are you really arguing that spores and queens do not counter the Lib harass? They do. I don't know how long it takes to deactivate ATG, move, activate ATG, and then fire one shot from the Lib, but I'm pretty sure the window when compared to an attended spore is extremely small (requiring constant micro, and basically meaning the harass will not do a lot of damage).
Can we move on?
You claim my post is "totally misguided".
The drive of my post: Lib requires lots of micro. It has an activated mode for each unit, lol, that changes attack and movement. Anyone really want to disagree that this does not constitute micro? As a harass unit the Lib requires a lot of micro, and a prepared Zerg with queens and spores will not take massive damage. This is totally misguided? I think I've said enough to at least reasonably push back on your rebuttal.
I'm open to being wrong, I just don't think I am in this argument. Maybe I am, though, Maybe someone can post the sweet spot, on all three bases, on all the maps, where even with spores and queens you cannot defend a Lib harass. *shrugs*
Allow me to elaborate on preparedness: if a Lib harass opener shows up, unscouted (which is difficult because of lings and overlords), and you do not have spores, you're going to lose the mining time it takes to build a spore, and maybe a queen if you try to fight the Lib instead of building a spore.
What league are you in HOTS and in LOTV, I'm currently writing a massive response for all the broken spots for liberators vs zerg so I will rebut your points in more detail with the general information in that, but I will say I still hold my opinion that you have no clue what you're talking about in regards to the strength of the liberator. The fact that you think 1 spore and 1 queen can stop 1 liberator is a joke.
A spore crawler is a ridiculously good counter to the liberator. So are queens, unless you literally walk into liberator range, you can easily dance around the liberator in early game lol. Most early liberator rushes with hellions are off of 1 CC or 2 CC in which the Terran just got their 2nd CC mining, so there is an investment the Terran is putting to try to do damage to you. It's holdable, and depending on how much the T loses can put them way behind, or can put them ahead.
Exactly, all harass, depending on the skill of the attacker and preparation of the defender, can either succeed wildly, fail spectacularly, or somewhere in between. If the player dont build spores when the cloaked banshee comes and loses 30 drones, who is at the fault, the game or the player? If the player dont make turrets when the dts come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If the player does not have any stargates ready when the mutas come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If you dont scout that your opponent is going for a liberator build and prepare spores in time, you deserve to lose.
On July 24 2015 06:08 [PkF] Wire wrote: The problem with liberators is how early they can hit and dominate a mineral line when the other player cannot realistically have air units if he isn't trying to directly counter them.
Even then, I thought colossi forcing out vikings was a bad thing, and now liberators forcing air (most T players that go bio against me tell me to get air units to force the liberators to unsiege) would be a good thing ? Please. The tech requirements and timings on such strong zone control should be higher.
EDIT : big thanks to Ovid for that detailed research, I hope this opens some eyes. That kind of broken spots makes you wonder if Blizzard actually tests their stuff before patching it.
These so called "broken spots" are just as easily be used by Broodlords and Tempests. In fact they existed in maps dating all the way back the Broodwar. Did you know that a common tactic for Zerg in Broodwar ZvT is to morph mutas into guardians (equivalent to SC2's broodlords) behind the terran's natural and harass the mineral line in positions unreachable by marines? According the logic of certain posters, this would so imba that Zerg would be unbeatable!
Stop with those comparisons, you're embarrassing yourself. Tempests DPS is shit. Broodlords come out hours after liberators.
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.
Okay, so we've establish your disposition, lol. But we've all got a little arsehole in us, so I'll let that slide. But, I made some clear points. So, let's see if you address them ...
On July 23 2015 06:28 Ovid wrote: *snip!*
Since this is directed at me for this guys post
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 ...
I think I will explain my reasoning. The liberator doesn't require a ridiculous amount of micro to use with it's aa it's very static there's not many more tricks to it than A move or to focus fire. The ATG requires no movement or micro tricks, it just requires the person to set it up in a optimal position. Spores do not shut down the liberator as a harass based unit, on all of the maps there's a spot that the Liberator can hit one of your 3 bases mineral lines without being affected by a sporecrawler. Uprooting and rooting a spore takes 7 seconds I don't have the precise switching time for the liberator but it is substantially below that number spores are only effective in that manner in the lategame when you have more creep space to maneuver. It's a totally misguided post.
Okay, perhaps the context and essence of my post was unclear. Was it not obvious that I was primarily talking about the Air-to-Ground (ATG) mode? And also, specifically in a harass role? *shrugs* I don't think anyone is arguing that the Air-to-Air a-move requires much micro. Can we move on?
You then make this claim. Lulz. I'm almost tempted to just assume that this is not a serious rebuttal ... The lib cannot ATG and move. So, you have to move, and then activate ATG. That's micro. The ATG has an animation tell, and a huge warning marker for the opponent. Spores cannot be targeted, so are free to build and move. So, you roll in, activate these modes, maybe get a couple shots off, then you have to re-position to avoid the spore or the queen. Select > deactivate > move > reactivate target > observe what's happening > repeat. Now, imagine there is more than one?
You then make this claim. Oh, really? Is that a fact? Lulz. Are you really arguing that spores and queens do not counter the Lib harass? They do. I don't know how long it takes to deactivate ATG, move, activate ATG, and then fire one shot from the Lib, but I'm pretty sure the window when compared to an attended spore is extremely small (requiring constant micro, and basically meaning the harass will not do a lot of damage).
Can we move on?
You claim my post is "totally misguided".
The drive of my post: Lib requires lots of micro. It has an activated mode for each unit, lol, that changes attack and movement. Anyone really want to disagree that this does not constitute micro? As a harass unit the Lib requires a lot of micro, and a prepared Zerg with queens and spores will not take massive damage. This is totally misguided? I think I've said enough to at least reasonably push back on your rebuttal.
I'm open to being wrong, I just don't think I am in this argument. Maybe I am, though, Maybe someone can post the sweet spot, on all three bases, on all the maps, where even with spores and queens you cannot defend a Lib harass. *shrugs*
Allow me to elaborate on preparedness: if a Lib harass opener shows up, unscouted (which is difficult because of lings and overlords), and you do not have spores, you're going to lose the mining time it takes to build a spore, and maybe a queen if you try to fight the Lib instead of building a spore.
What league are you in HOTS and in LOTV, I'm currently writing a massive response for all the broken spots for liberators vs zerg so I will rebut your points in more detail with the general information in that, but I will say I still hold my opinion that you have no clue what you're talking about in regards to the strength of the liberator. The fact that you think 1 spore and 1 queen can stop 1 liberator is a joke.
A spore crawler is a ridiculously good counter to the liberator. So are queens, unless you literally walk into liberator range, you can easily dance around the liberator in early game lol. Most early liberator rushes with hellions are off of 1 CC or 2 CC in which the Terran just got their 2nd CC mining, so there is an investment the Terran is putting to try to do damage to you. It's holdable, and depending on how much the T loses can put them way behind, or can put them ahead.
Exactly, all harass, depending on the skill of the attacker and preparation of the defender, can either succeed wildly, fail spectacularly, or somewhere in between. If the player dont build spores when the cloaked banshee comes and loses 30 drones, who is at the fault, the game or the player? If the player dont make turrets when the dts come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If the player does not have any stargates ready when the mutas come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If you dont scout that your opponent is going for a liberator build and prepare spores in time, you deserve to lose.
On July 24 2015 06:08 [PkF] Wire wrote: The problem with liberators is how early they can hit and dominate a mineral line when the other player cannot realistically have air units if he isn't trying to directly counter them.
Even then, I thought colossi forcing out vikings was a bad thing, and now liberators forcing air (most T players that go bio against me tell me to get air units to force the liberators to unsiege) would be a good thing ? Please. The tech requirements and timings on such strong zone control should be higher.
EDIT : big thanks to Ovid for that detailed research, I hope this opens some eyes. That kind of broken spots makes you wonder if Blizzard actually tests their stuff before patching it.
These so called "broken spots" are just as easily be used by Broodlords and Tempests. In fact they existed in maps dating all the way back the Broodwar. Did you know that a common tactic for Zerg in Broodwar ZvT is to morph mutas into guardians (equivalent to SC2's broodlords) behind the terran's natural and harass the mineral line in positions unreachable by marines? According the logic of certain posters, this would so imba that Zerg would be unbeatable!
Stop with those comparisons, you're embarrassing yourself. Tempests DPS is shit. Broodlords come out hours after liberators.
You cant refute my statements or answer why a commonly used tactic dating all the way back to Broodwar is suddenly "imba", so you resort to ad hominem attacks and strawman arguments. Brilliant.
You do realize that both Zerg and Protoss have units that are capable of doing long range air to ground for a long time already (Broodlords, Tempest)? So far there has been no complaints about them being imba in LOTV. So what exactly is wrong that Terran gets the same kind of unit that the two other races already have? Hint: If you are losing to liberator harass (which btw requires very heavy investment down a specific tech path by terran), maybe you should make some air units such as mutas, or better yet, do counter attacks/timing attacks instead of greedily droning up to 70 workers.
Broodlords and Tempests are T3. Liberators are lower tech that cost half as much as the other 2. Broodlords can't attack air, Tempests do much much less DPS.
If Liberators cost 300 / 300 and came after fusion core, maybe then we wouldn't complain as much.
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.
Okay, so we've establish your disposition, lol. But we've all got a little arsehole in us, so I'll let that slide. But, I made some clear points. So, let's see if you address them ...
On July 23 2015 06:28 Ovid wrote: *snip!*
Since this is directed at me for this guys post
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 ...
I think I will explain my reasoning. The liberator doesn't require a ridiculous amount of micro to use with it's aa it's very static there's not many more tricks to it than A move or to focus fire. The ATG requires no movement or micro tricks, it just requires the person to set it up in a optimal position. Spores do not shut down the liberator as a harass based unit, on all of the maps there's a spot that the Liberator can hit one of your 3 bases mineral lines without being affected by a sporecrawler. Uprooting and rooting a spore takes 7 seconds I don't have the precise switching time for the liberator but it is substantially below that number spores are only effective in that manner in the lategame when you have more creep space to maneuver. It's a totally misguided post.
Okay, perhaps the context and essence of my post was unclear. Was it not obvious that I was primarily talking about the Air-to-Ground (ATG) mode? And also, specifically in a harass role? *shrugs* I don't think anyone is arguing that the Air-to-Air a-move requires much micro. Can we move on?
You then make this claim. Lulz. I'm almost tempted to just assume that this is not a serious rebuttal ... The lib cannot ATG and move. So, you have to move, and then activate ATG. That's micro. The ATG has an animation tell, and a huge warning marker for the opponent. Spores cannot be targeted, so are free to build and move. So, you roll in, activate these modes, maybe get a couple shots off, then you have to re-position to avoid the spore or the queen. Select > deactivate > move > reactivate target > observe what's happening > repeat. Now, imagine there is more than one?
You then make this claim. Oh, really? Is that a fact? Lulz. Are you really arguing that spores and queens do not counter the Lib harass? They do. I don't know how long it takes to deactivate ATG, move, activate ATG, and then fire one shot from the Lib, but I'm pretty sure the window when compared to an attended spore is extremely small (requiring constant micro, and basically meaning the harass will not do a lot of damage).
Can we move on?
You claim my post is "totally misguided".
The drive of my post: Lib requires lots of micro. It has an activated mode for each unit, lol, that changes attack and movement. Anyone really want to disagree that this does not constitute micro? As a harass unit the Lib requires a lot of micro, and a prepared Zerg with queens and spores will not take massive damage. This is totally misguided? I think I've said enough to at least reasonably push back on your rebuttal.
I'm open to being wrong, I just don't think I am in this argument. Maybe I am, though, Maybe someone can post the sweet spot, on all three bases, on all the maps, where even with spores and queens you cannot defend a Lib harass. *shrugs*
Allow me to elaborate on preparedness: if a Lib harass opener shows up, unscouted (which is difficult because of lings and overlords), and you do not have spores, you're going to lose the mining time it takes to build a spore, and maybe a queen if you try to fight the Lib instead of building a spore.
What league are you in HOTS and in LOTV, I'm currently writing a massive response for all the broken spots for liberators vs zerg so I will rebut your points in more detail with the general information in that, but I will say I still hold my opinion that you have no clue what you're talking about in regards to the strength of the liberator. The fact that you think 1 spore and 1 queen can stop 1 liberator is a joke.
A spore crawler is a ridiculously good counter to the liberator. So are queens, unless you literally walk into liberator range, you can easily dance around the liberator in early game lol. Most early liberator rushes with hellions are off of 1 CC or 2 CC in which the Terran just got their 2nd CC mining, so there is an investment the Terran is putting to try to do damage to you. It's holdable, and depending on how much the T loses can put them way behind, or can put them ahead.
Exactly, all harass, depending on the skill of the attacker and preparation of the defender, can either succeed wildly, fail spectacularly, or somewhere in between. If the player dont build spores when the cloaked banshee comes and loses 30 drones, who is at the fault, the game or the player? If the player dont make turrets when the dts come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If the player does not have any stargates ready when the mutas come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If you dont scout that your opponent is going for a liberator build and prepare spores in time, you deserve to lose.
On July 24 2015 06:08 [PkF] Wire wrote: The problem with liberators is how early they can hit and dominate a mineral line when the other player cannot realistically have air units if he isn't trying to directly counter them.
Even then, I thought colossi forcing out vikings was a bad thing, and now liberators forcing air (most T players that go bio against me tell me to get air units to force the liberators to unsiege) would be a good thing ? Please. The tech requirements and timings on such strong zone control should be higher.
EDIT : big thanks to Ovid for that detailed research, I hope this opens some eyes. That kind of broken spots makes you wonder if Blizzard actually tests their stuff before patching it.
These so called "broken spots" are just as easily used by Broodlords and Tempests. In fact they existed in maps dating all the way back to Broodwar. Did you know that a common tactic for Zerg in Broodwar ZvT is to morph mutas into guardians (equivalent to SC2's broodlords) behind the terran's natural and harass the mineral line in positions unreachable by marines? According to the logic of certain posters, this would so imba that Zerg would be unbeatable!
I hope your trolling cuz nobody can be this bad right ? Or you must be a kid...
1. spores are outranged by Liberators, dont compare them to oracles or banshee cuz those units dont have 15 range 2. liberators come at 5 min in the game, broodlors come at 30+ by that time you have air units
Im forced into 2 base spire that gets me killed against any good terran because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg and the next bio push destroys you.
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.
Okay, so we've establish your disposition, lol. But we've all got a little arsehole in us, so I'll let that slide. But, I made some clear points. So, let's see if you address them ...
On July 23 2015 06:28 Ovid wrote: *snip!*
Since this is directed at me for this guys post
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 ...
I think I will explain my reasoning. The liberator doesn't require a ridiculous amount of micro to use with it's aa it's very static there's not many more tricks to it than A move or to focus fire. The ATG requires no movement or micro tricks, it just requires the person to set it up in a optimal position. Spores do not shut down the liberator as a harass based unit, on all of the maps there's a spot that the Liberator can hit one of your 3 bases mineral lines without being affected by a sporecrawler. Uprooting and rooting a spore takes 7 seconds I don't have the precise switching time for the liberator but it is substantially below that number spores are only effective in that manner in the lategame when you have more creep space to maneuver. It's a totally misguided post.
Okay, perhaps the context and essence of my post was unclear. Was it not obvious that I was primarily talking about the Air-to-Ground (ATG) mode? And also, specifically in a harass role? *shrugs* I don't think anyone is arguing that the Air-to-Air a-move requires much micro. Can we move on?
You then make this claim. Lulz. I'm almost tempted to just assume that this is not a serious rebuttal ... The lib cannot ATG and move. So, you have to move, and then activate ATG. That's micro. The ATG has an animation tell, and a huge warning marker for the opponent. Spores cannot be targeted, so are free to build and move. So, you roll in, activate these modes, maybe get a couple shots off, then you have to re-position to avoid the spore or the queen. Select > deactivate > move > reactivate target > observe what's happening > repeat. Now, imagine there is more than one?
You then make this claim. Oh, really? Is that a fact? Lulz. Are you really arguing that spores and queens do not counter the Lib harass? They do. I don't know how long it takes to deactivate ATG, move, activate ATG, and then fire one shot from the Lib, but I'm pretty sure the window when compared to an attended spore is extremely small (requiring constant micro, and basically meaning the harass will not do a lot of damage).
Can we move on?
You claim my post is "totally misguided".
The drive of my post: Lib requires lots of micro. It has an activated mode for each unit, lol, that changes attack and movement. Anyone really want to disagree that this does not constitute micro? As a harass unit the Lib requires a lot of micro, and a prepared Zerg with queens and spores will not take massive damage. This is totally misguided? I think I've said enough to at least reasonably push back on your rebuttal.
I'm open to being wrong, I just don't think I am in this argument. Maybe I am, though, Maybe someone can post the sweet spot, on all three bases, on all the maps, where even with spores and queens you cannot defend a Lib harass. *shrugs*
Allow me to elaborate on preparedness: if a Lib harass opener shows up, unscouted (which is difficult because of lings and overlords), and you do not have spores, you're going to lose the mining time it takes to build a spore, and maybe a queen if you try to fight the Lib instead of building a spore.
What league are you in HOTS and in LOTV, I'm currently writing a massive response for all the broken spots for liberators vs zerg so I will rebut your points in more detail with the general information in that, but I will say I still hold my opinion that you have no clue what you're talking about in regards to the strength of the liberator. The fact that you think 1 spore and 1 queen can stop 1 liberator is a joke.
A spore crawler is a ridiculously good counter to the liberator. So are queens, unless you literally walk into liberator range, you can easily dance around the liberator in early game lol. Most early liberator rushes with hellions are off of 1 CC or 2 CC in which the Terran just got their 2nd CC mining, so there is an investment the Terran is putting to try to do damage to you. It's holdable, and depending on how much the T loses can put them way behind, or can put them ahead.
Exactly, all harass, depending on the skill of the attacker and preparation of the defender, can either succeed wildly, fail spectacularly, or somewhere in between. If the player dont build spores when the cloaked banshee comes and loses 30 drones, who is at the fault, the game or the player? If the player dont make turrets when the dts come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If the player does not have any stargates ready when the mutas come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If you dont scout that your opponent is going for a liberator build and prepare spores in time, you deserve to lose.
On July 24 2015 06:08 [PkF] Wire wrote: The problem with liberators is how early they can hit and dominate a mineral line when the other player cannot realistically have air units if he isn't trying to directly counter them.
Even then, I thought colossi forcing out vikings was a bad thing, and now liberators forcing air (most T players that go bio against me tell me to get air units to force the liberators to unsiege) would be a good thing ? Please. The tech requirements and timings on such strong zone control should be higher.
EDIT : big thanks to Ovid for that detailed research, I hope this opens some eyes. That kind of broken spots makes you wonder if Blizzard actually tests their stuff before patching it.
These so called "broken spots" are just as easily be used by Broodlords and Tempests. In fact they existed in maps dating all the way back the Broodwar. Did you know that a common tactic for Zerg in Broodwar ZvT is to morph mutas into guardians (equivalent to SC2's broodlords) behind the terran's natural and harass the mineral line in positions unreachable by marines? According the logic of certain posters, this would so imba that Zerg would be unbeatable!
Stop with those comparisons, you're embarrassing yourself. Tempests DPS is shit. Broodlords come out hours after liberators.
You cant refute my statements or answer why a commonly used tactic dating all the way back to Broodwar is suddenly "imba", so you resort to ad hominem attacks. Brilliant.
What part of "broodlords and tempests are just not comparable to liberators due to their timing, price, accessibility and strength" don't you understand ?
I'm not engaging in a discussion about BW balance, I never even finished the T campaign.
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.
Okay, so we've establish your disposition, lol. But we've all got a little arsehole in us, so I'll let that slide. But, I made some clear points. So, let's see if you address them ...
On July 23 2015 06:28 Ovid wrote: *snip!*
Since this is directed at me for this guys post
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 ...
I think I will explain my reasoning. The liberator doesn't require a ridiculous amount of micro to use with it's aa it's very static there's not many more tricks to it than A move or to focus fire. The ATG requires no movement or micro tricks, it just requires the person to set it up in a optimal position. Spores do not shut down the liberator as a harass based unit, on all of the maps there's a spot that the Liberator can hit one of your 3 bases mineral lines without being affected by a sporecrawler. Uprooting and rooting a spore takes 7 seconds I don't have the precise switching time for the liberator but it is substantially below that number spores are only effective in that manner in the lategame when you have more creep space to maneuver. It's a totally misguided post.
Okay, perhaps the context and essence of my post was unclear. Was it not obvious that I was primarily talking about the Air-to-Ground (ATG) mode? And also, specifically in a harass role? *shrugs* I don't think anyone is arguing that the Air-to-Air a-move requires much micro. Can we move on?
You then make this claim. Lulz. I'm almost tempted to just assume that this is not a serious rebuttal ... The lib cannot ATG and move. So, you have to move, and then activate ATG. That's micro. The ATG has an animation tell, and a huge warning marker for the opponent. Spores cannot be targeted, so are free to build and move. So, you roll in, activate these modes, maybe get a couple shots off, then you have to re-position to avoid the spore or the queen. Select > deactivate > move > reactivate target > observe what's happening > repeat. Now, imagine there is more than one?
You then make this claim. Oh, really? Is that a fact? Lulz. Are you really arguing that spores and queens do not counter the Lib harass? They do. I don't know how long it takes to deactivate ATG, move, activate ATG, and then fire one shot from the Lib, but I'm pretty sure the window when compared to an attended spore is extremely small (requiring constant micro, and basically meaning the harass will not do a lot of damage).
Can we move on?
You claim my post is "totally misguided".
The drive of my post: Lib requires lots of micro. It has an activated mode for each unit, lol, that changes attack and movement. Anyone really want to disagree that this does not constitute micro? As a harass unit the Lib requires a lot of micro, and a prepared Zerg with queens and spores will not take massive damage. This is totally misguided? I think I've said enough to at least reasonably push back on your rebuttal.
I'm open to being wrong, I just don't think I am in this argument. Maybe I am, though, Maybe someone can post the sweet spot, on all three bases, on all the maps, where even with spores and queens you cannot defend a Lib harass. *shrugs*
Allow me to elaborate on preparedness: if a Lib harass opener shows up, unscouted (which is difficult because of lings and overlords), and you do not have spores, you're going to lose the mining time it takes to build a spore, and maybe a queen if you try to fight the Lib instead of building a spore.
What league are you in HOTS and in LOTV, I'm currently writing a massive response for all the broken spots for liberators vs zerg so I will rebut your points in more detail with the general information in that, but I will say I still hold my opinion that you have no clue what you're talking about in regards to the strength of the liberator. The fact that you think 1 spore and 1 queen can stop 1 liberator is a joke.
A spore crawler is a ridiculously good counter to the liberator. So are queens, unless you literally walk into liberator range, you can easily dance around the liberator in early game lol. Most early liberator rushes with hellions are off of 1 CC or 2 CC in which the Terran just got their 2nd CC mining, so there is an investment the Terran is putting to try to do damage to you. It's holdable, and depending on how much the T loses can put them way behind, or can put them ahead.
Exactly, all harass, depending on the skill of the attacker and preparation of the defender, can either succeed wildly, fail spectacularly, or somewhere in between. If the player dont build spores when the cloaked banshee comes and loses 30 drones, who is at the fault, the game or the player? If the player dont make turrets when the dts come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If the player does not have any stargates ready when the mutas come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If you dont scout that your opponent is going for a liberator build and prepare spores in time, you deserve to lose.
On July 24 2015 06:08 [PkF] Wire wrote: The problem with liberators is how early they can hit and dominate a mineral line when the other player cannot realistically have air units if he isn't trying to directly counter them.
Even then, I thought colossi forcing out vikings was a bad thing, and now liberators forcing air (most T players that go bio against me tell me to get air units to force the liberators to unsiege) would be a good thing ? Please. The tech requirements and timings on such strong zone control should be higher.
EDIT : big thanks to Ovid for that detailed research, I hope this opens some eyes. That kind of broken spots makes you wonder if Blizzard actually tests their stuff before patching it.
These so called "broken spots" are just as easily be used by Broodlords and Tempests. In fact they existed in maps dating all the way back the Broodwar. Did you know that a common tactic for Zerg in Broodwar ZvT is to morph mutas into guardians (equivalent to SC2's broodlords) behind the terran's natural and harass the mineral line in positions unreachable by marines? According the logic of certain posters, this would so imba that Zerg would be unbeatable!
Stop with those comparisons, you're embarrassing yourself. Tempests DPS is shit. Broodlords come out hours after liberators.
You cant refute my statements or answer why a commonly used tactic dating all the way back to Broodwar is suddenly "imba", so you resort to ad hominem attacks. Brilliant.
How we refuted your last failed point, the time in which that happened isn't as early, it still required a hive to pull off and you're not getting a hive + great spire and then morphing a guardian in before 4:50.
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.
Okay, so we've establish your disposition, lol. But we've all got a little arsehole in us, so I'll let that slide. But, I made some clear points. So, let's see if you address them ...
On July 23 2015 06:28 Ovid wrote: *snip!*
Since this is directed at me for this guys post
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 ...
I think I will explain my reasoning. The liberator doesn't require a ridiculous amount of micro to use with it's aa it's very static there's not many more tricks to it than A move or to focus fire. The ATG requires no movement or micro tricks, it just requires the person to set it up in a optimal position. Spores do not shut down the liberator as a harass based unit, on all of the maps there's a spot that the Liberator can hit one of your 3 bases mineral lines without being affected by a sporecrawler. Uprooting and rooting a spore takes 7 seconds I don't have the precise switching time for the liberator but it is substantially below that number spores are only effective in that manner in the lategame when you have more creep space to maneuver. It's a totally misguided post.
Okay, perhaps the context and essence of my post was unclear. Was it not obvious that I was primarily talking about the Air-to-Ground (ATG) mode? And also, specifically in a harass role? *shrugs* I don't think anyone is arguing that the Air-to-Air a-move requires much micro. Can we move on?
You then make this claim. Lulz. I'm almost tempted to just assume that this is not a serious rebuttal ... The lib cannot ATG and move. So, you have to move, and then activate ATG. That's micro. The ATG has an animation tell, and a huge warning marker for the opponent. Spores cannot be targeted, so are free to build and move. So, you roll in, activate these modes, maybe get a couple shots off, then you have to re-position to avoid the spore or the queen. Select > deactivate > move > reactivate target > observe what's happening > repeat. Now, imagine there is more than one?
You then make this claim. Oh, really? Is that a fact? Lulz. Are you really arguing that spores and queens do not counter the Lib harass? They do. I don't know how long it takes to deactivate ATG, move, activate ATG, and then fire one shot from the Lib, but I'm pretty sure the window when compared to an attended spore is extremely small (requiring constant micro, and basically meaning the harass will not do a lot of damage).
Can we move on?
You claim my post is "totally misguided".
The drive of my post: Lib requires lots of micro. It has an activated mode for each unit, lol, that changes attack and movement. Anyone really want to disagree that this does not constitute micro? As a harass unit the Lib requires a lot of micro, and a prepared Zerg with queens and spores will not take massive damage. This is totally misguided? I think I've said enough to at least reasonably push back on your rebuttal.
I'm open to being wrong, I just don't think I am in this argument. Maybe I am, though, Maybe someone can post the sweet spot, on all three bases, on all the maps, where even with spores and queens you cannot defend a Lib harass. *shrugs*
Allow me to elaborate on preparedness: if a Lib harass opener shows up, unscouted (which is difficult because of lings and overlords), and you do not have spores, you're going to lose the mining time it takes to build a spore, and maybe a queen if you try to fight the Lib instead of building a spore.
What league are you in HOTS and in LOTV, I'm currently writing a massive response for all the broken spots for liberators vs zerg so I will rebut your points in more detail with the general information in that, but I will say I still hold my opinion that you have no clue what you're talking about in regards to the strength of the liberator. The fact that you think 1 spore and 1 queen can stop 1 liberator is a joke.
A spore crawler is a ridiculously good counter to the liberator. So are queens, unless you literally walk into liberator range, you can easily dance around the liberator in early game lol. Most early liberator rushes with hellions are off of 1 CC or 2 CC in which the Terran just got their 2nd CC mining, so there is an investment the Terran is putting to try to do damage to you. It's holdable, and depending on how much the T loses can put them way behind, or can put them ahead.
Exactly, all harass, depending on the skill of the attacker and preparation of the defender, can either succeed wildly, fail spectacularly, or somewhere in between. If the player dont build spores when the cloaked banshee comes and loses 30 drones, who is at the fault, the game or the player? If the player dont make turrets when the dts come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If the player does not have any stargates ready when the mutas come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If you dont scout that your opponent is going for a liberator build and prepare spores in time, you deserve to lose.
On July 24 2015 06:08 [PkF] Wire wrote: The problem with liberators is how early they can hit and dominate a mineral line when the other player cannot realistically have air units if he isn't trying to directly counter them.
Even then, I thought colossi forcing out vikings was a bad thing, and now liberators forcing air (most T players that go bio against me tell me to get air units to force the liberators to unsiege) would be a good thing ? Please. The tech requirements and timings on such strong zone control should be higher.
EDIT : big thanks to Ovid for that detailed research, I hope this opens some eyes. That kind of broken spots makes you wonder if Blizzard actually tests their stuff before patching it.
These so called "broken spots" are just as easily be used by Broodlords and Tempests. In fact they existed in maps dating all the way back the Broodwar. Did you know that a common tactic for Zerg in Broodwar ZvT is to morph mutas into guardians (equivalent to SC2's broodlords) behind the terran's natural and harass the mineral line in positions unreachable by marines? According the logic of certain posters, this would so imba that Zerg would be unbeatable!
Stop with those comparisons, you're embarrassing yourself. Tempests DPS is shit. Broodlords come out hours after liberators.
You cant refute my statements or answer why a commonly used tactic dating all the way back to Broodwar is suddenly "imba", so you resort to ad hominem attacks. Brilliant.
How we refuted your last failed point, the time in which that happened isn't as early, it still required a hive to pull off and you're not getting a hive + great spire and then morphing a guardian in before 4:50.
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.
Okay, so we've establish your disposition, lol. But we've all got a little arsehole in us, so I'll let that slide. But, I made some clear points. So, let's see if you address them ...
On July 23 2015 06:28 Ovid wrote: *snip!*
Since this is directed at me for this guys post
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 ...
I think I will explain my reasoning. The liberator doesn't require a ridiculous amount of micro to use with it's aa it's very static there's not many more tricks to it than A move or to focus fire. The ATG requires no movement or micro tricks, it just requires the person to set it up in a optimal position. Spores do not shut down the liberator as a harass based unit, on all of the maps there's a spot that the Liberator can hit one of your 3 bases mineral lines without being affected by a sporecrawler. Uprooting and rooting a spore takes 7 seconds I don't have the precise switching time for the liberator but it is substantially below that number spores are only effective in that manner in the lategame when you have more creep space to maneuver. It's a totally misguided post.
Okay, perhaps the context and essence of my post was unclear. Was it not obvious that I was primarily talking about the Air-to-Ground (ATG) mode? And also, specifically in a harass role? *shrugs* I don't think anyone is arguing that the Air-to-Air a-move requires much micro. Can we move on?
You then make this claim. Lulz. I'm almost tempted to just assume that this is not a serious rebuttal ... The lib cannot ATG and move. So, you have to move, and then activate ATG. That's micro. The ATG has an animation tell, and a huge warning marker for the opponent. Spores cannot be targeted, so are free to build and move. So, you roll in, activate these modes, maybe get a couple shots off, then you have to re-position to avoid the spore or the queen. Select > deactivate > move > reactivate target > observe what's happening > repeat. Now, imagine there is more than one?
You then make this claim. Oh, really? Is that a fact? Lulz. Are you really arguing that spores and queens do not counter the Lib harass? They do. I don't know how long it takes to deactivate ATG, move, activate ATG, and then fire one shot from the Lib, but I'm pretty sure the window when compared to an attended spore is extremely small (requiring constant micro, and basically meaning the harass will not do a lot of damage).
Can we move on?
You claim my post is "totally misguided".
The drive of my post: Lib requires lots of micro. It has an activated mode for each unit, lol, that changes attack and movement. Anyone really want to disagree that this does not constitute micro? As a harass unit the Lib requires a lot of micro, and a prepared Zerg with queens and spores will not take massive damage. This is totally misguided? I think I've said enough to at least reasonably push back on your rebuttal.
I'm open to being wrong, I just don't think I am in this argument. Maybe I am, though, Maybe someone can post the sweet spot, on all three bases, on all the maps, where even with spores and queens you cannot defend a Lib harass. *shrugs*
Allow me to elaborate on preparedness: if a Lib harass opener shows up, unscouted (which is difficult because of lings and overlords), and you do not have spores, you're going to lose the mining time it takes to build a spore, and maybe a queen if you try to fight the Lib instead of building a spore.
What league are you in HOTS and in LOTV, I'm currently writing a massive response for all the broken spots for liberators vs zerg so I will rebut your points in more detail with the general information in that, but I will say I still hold my opinion that you have no clue what you're talking about in regards to the strength of the liberator. The fact that you think 1 spore and 1 queen can stop 1 liberator is a joke.
A spore crawler is a ridiculously good counter to the liberator. So are queens, unless you literally walk into liberator range, you can easily dance around the liberator in early game lol. Most early liberator rushes with hellions are off of 1 CC or 2 CC in which the Terran just got their 2nd CC mining, so there is an investment the Terran is putting to try to do damage to you. It's holdable, and depending on how much the T loses can put them way behind, or can put them ahead.
Exactly, all harass, depending on the skill of the attacker and preparation of the defender, can either succeed wildly, fail spectacularly, or somewhere in between. If the player dont build spores when the cloaked banshee comes and loses 30 drones, who is at the fault, the game or the player? If the player dont make turrets when the dts come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If the player does not have any stargates ready when the mutas come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If you dont scout that your opponent is going for a liberator build and prepare spores in time, you deserve to lose.
On July 24 2015 06:08 [PkF] Wire wrote: The problem with liberators is how early they can hit and dominate a mineral line when the other player cannot realistically have air units if he isn't trying to directly counter them.
Even then, I thought colossi forcing out vikings was a bad thing, and now liberators forcing air (most T players that go bio against me tell me to get air units to force the liberators to unsiege) would be a good thing ? Please. The tech requirements and timings on such strong zone control should be higher.
EDIT : big thanks to Ovid for that detailed research, I hope this opens some eyes. That kind of broken spots makes you wonder if Blizzard actually tests their stuff before patching it.
These so called "broken spots" are just as easily be used by Broodlords and Tempests. In fact they existed in maps dating all the way back the Broodwar. Did you know that a common tactic for Zerg in Broodwar ZvT is to morph mutas into guardians (equivalent to SC2's broodlords) behind the terran's natural and harass the mineral line in positions unreachable by marines? According the logic of certain posters, this would so imba that Zerg would be unbeatable!
Stop with those comparisons, you're embarrassing yourself. Tempests DPS is shit. Broodlords come out hours after liberators.
You cant refute my statements or answer why a commonly used tactic dating all the way back to Broodwar is suddenly "imba", so you resort to ad hominem attacks. Brilliant.
What part of "broodlords and tempests are just not comparable to liberators due to their timing, price, accessibility and strength" don't you understand ?
I'm not engaging in a discussion about BW balance, I never even finished the T campaign.
According to him, it's an 'ad hominem' attack when you address the different units lol. He's definitely got the 'dont nerf my race bro' attitude going on.
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.
Okay, so we've establish your disposition, lol. But we've all got a little arsehole in us, so I'll let that slide. But, I made some clear points. So, let's see if you address them ...
On July 23 2015 06:28 Ovid wrote: *snip!*
Since this is directed at me for this guys post
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 ...
I think I will explain my reasoning. The liberator doesn't require a ridiculous amount of micro to use with it's aa it's very static there's not many more tricks to it than A move or to focus fire. The ATG requires no movement or micro tricks, it just requires the person to set it up in a optimal position. Spores do not shut down the liberator as a harass based unit, on all of the maps there's a spot that the Liberator can hit one of your 3 bases mineral lines without being affected by a sporecrawler. Uprooting and rooting a spore takes 7 seconds I don't have the precise switching time for the liberator but it is substantially below that number spores are only effective in that manner in the lategame when you have more creep space to maneuver. It's a totally misguided post.
Okay, perhaps the context and essence of my post was unclear. Was it not obvious that I was primarily talking about the Air-to-Ground (ATG) mode? And also, specifically in a harass role? *shrugs* I don't think anyone is arguing that the Air-to-Air a-move requires much micro. Can we move on?
You then make this claim. Lulz. I'm almost tempted to just assume that this is not a serious rebuttal ... The lib cannot ATG and move. So, you have to move, and then activate ATG. That's micro. The ATG has an animation tell, and a huge warning marker for the opponent. Spores cannot be targeted, so are free to build and move. So, you roll in, activate these modes, maybe get a couple shots off, then you have to re-position to avoid the spore or the queen. Select > deactivate > move > reactivate target > observe what's happening > repeat. Now, imagine there is more than one?
You then make this claim. Oh, really? Is that a fact? Lulz. Are you really arguing that spores and queens do not counter the Lib harass? They do. I don't know how long it takes to deactivate ATG, move, activate ATG, and then fire one shot from the Lib, but I'm pretty sure the window when compared to an attended spore is extremely small (requiring constant micro, and basically meaning the harass will not do a lot of damage).
Can we move on?
You claim my post is "totally misguided".
The drive of my post: Lib requires lots of micro. It has an activated mode for each unit, lol, that changes attack and movement. Anyone really want to disagree that this does not constitute micro? As a harass unit the Lib requires a lot of micro, and a prepared Zerg with queens and spores will not take massive damage. This is totally misguided? I think I've said enough to at least reasonably push back on your rebuttal.
I'm open to being wrong, I just don't think I am in this argument. Maybe I am, though, Maybe someone can post the sweet spot, on all three bases, on all the maps, where even with spores and queens you cannot defend a Lib harass. *shrugs*
Allow me to elaborate on preparedness: if a Lib harass opener shows up, unscouted (which is difficult because of lings and overlords), and you do not have spores, you're going to lose the mining time it takes to build a spore, and maybe a queen if you try to fight the Lib instead of building a spore.
What league are you in HOTS and in LOTV, I'm currently writing a massive response for all the broken spots for liberators vs zerg so I will rebut your points in more detail with the general information in that, but I will say I still hold my opinion that you have no clue what you're talking about in regards to the strength of the liberator. The fact that you think 1 spore and 1 queen can stop 1 liberator is a joke.
A spore crawler is a ridiculously good counter to the liberator. So are queens, unless you literally walk into liberator range, you can easily dance around the liberator in early game lol. Most early liberator rushes with hellions are off of 1 CC or 2 CC in which the Terran just got their 2nd CC mining, so there is an investment the Terran is putting to try to do damage to you. It's holdable, and depending on how much the T loses can put them way behind, or can put them ahead.
Exactly, all harass, depending on the skill of the attacker and preparation of the defender, can either succeed wildly, fail spectacularly, or somewhere in between. If the player dont build spores when the cloaked banshee comes and loses 30 drones, who is at the fault, the game or the player? If the player dont make turrets when the dts come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If the player does not have any stargates ready when the mutas come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If you dont scout that your opponent is going for a liberator build and prepare spores in time, you deserve to lose.
On July 24 2015 06:08 [PkF] Wire wrote: The problem with liberators is how early they can hit and dominate a mineral line when the other player cannot realistically have air units if he isn't trying to directly counter them.
Even then, I thought colossi forcing out vikings was a bad thing, and now liberators forcing air (most T players that go bio against me tell me to get air units to force the liberators to unsiege) would be a good thing ? Please. The tech requirements and timings on such strong zone control should be higher.
EDIT : big thanks to Ovid for that detailed research, I hope this opens some eyes. That kind of broken spots makes you wonder if Blizzard actually tests their stuff before patching it.
These so called "broken spots" are just as easily be used by Broodlords and Tempests. In fact they existed in maps dating all the way back the Broodwar. Did you know that a common tactic for Zerg in Broodwar ZvT is to morph mutas into guardians (equivalent to SC2's broodlords) behind the terran's natural and harass the mineral line in positions unreachable by marines? According the logic of certain posters, this would so imba that Zerg would be unbeatable!
Stop with those comparisons, you're embarrassing yourself. Tempests DPS is shit. Broodlords come out hours after liberators.
You cant refute my statements or answer why a commonly used tactic dating all the way back to Broodwar is suddenly "imba", so you resort to ad hominem attacks. Brilliant.
What part of "broodlords and tempests are just not comparable to liberators due to their timing, price, accessibility and strength" don't you understand ?
I'm not engaging in a discussion about BW balance, I never even finished the T campaign.
According to him, it's an 'ad hominem' attack when you address the different units lol. He's definitely got the 'dont nerf my race bro' attitude going on.
Or maybe he's identified himself with Terran so much it's "ad hominem" to even question Liberator balance in front of him. "Don't you dare questioning my baby !"
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.
Okay, so we've establish your disposition, lol. But we've all got a little arsehole in us, so I'll let that slide. But, I made some clear points. So, let's see if you address them ...
On July 23 2015 06:28 Ovid wrote: *snip!*
Since this is directed at me for this guys post
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 ...
I think I will explain my reasoning. The liberator doesn't require a ridiculous amount of micro to use with it's aa it's very static there's not many more tricks to it than A move or to focus fire. The ATG requires no movement or micro tricks, it just requires the person to set it up in a optimal position. Spores do not shut down the liberator as a harass based unit, on all of the maps there's a spot that the Liberator can hit one of your 3 bases mineral lines without being affected by a sporecrawler. Uprooting and rooting a spore takes 7 seconds I don't have the precise switching time for the liberator but it is substantially below that number spores are only effective in that manner in the lategame when you have more creep space to maneuver. It's a totally misguided post.
Okay, perhaps the context and essence of my post was unclear. Was it not obvious that I was primarily talking about the Air-to-Ground (ATG) mode? And also, specifically in a harass role? *shrugs* I don't think anyone is arguing that the Air-to-Air a-move requires much micro. Can we move on?
You then make this claim. Lulz. I'm almost tempted to just assume that this is not a serious rebuttal ... The lib cannot ATG and move. So, you have to move, and then activate ATG. That's micro. The ATG has an animation tell, and a huge warning marker for the opponent. Spores cannot be targeted, so are free to build and move. So, you roll in, activate these modes, maybe get a couple shots off, then you have to re-position to avoid the spore or the queen. Select > deactivate > move > reactivate target > observe what's happening > repeat. Now, imagine there is more than one?
You then make this claim. Oh, really? Is that a fact? Lulz. Are you really arguing that spores and queens do not counter the Lib harass? They do. I don't know how long it takes to deactivate ATG, move, activate ATG, and then fire one shot from the Lib, but I'm pretty sure the window when compared to an attended spore is extremely small (requiring constant micro, and basically meaning the harass will not do a lot of damage).
Can we move on?
You claim my post is "totally misguided".
The drive of my post: Lib requires lots of micro. It has an activated mode for each unit, lol, that changes attack and movement. Anyone really want to disagree that this does not constitute micro? As a harass unit the Lib requires a lot of micro, and a prepared Zerg with queens and spores will not take massive damage. This is totally misguided? I think I've said enough to at least reasonably push back on your rebuttal.
I'm open to being wrong, I just don't think I am in this argument. Maybe I am, though, Maybe someone can post the sweet spot, on all three bases, on all the maps, where even with spores and queens you cannot defend a Lib harass. *shrugs*
Allow me to elaborate on preparedness: if a Lib harass opener shows up, unscouted (which is difficult because of lings and overlords), and you do not have spores, you're going to lose the mining time it takes to build a spore, and maybe a queen if you try to fight the Lib instead of building a spore.
What league are you in HOTS and in LOTV, I'm currently writing a massive response for all the broken spots for liberators vs zerg so I will rebut your points in more detail with the general information in that, but I will say I still hold my opinion that you have no clue what you're talking about in regards to the strength of the liberator. The fact that you think 1 spore and 1 queen can stop 1 liberator is a joke.
A spore crawler is a ridiculously good counter to the liberator. So are queens, unless you literally walk into liberator range, you can easily dance around the liberator in early game lol. Most early liberator rushes with hellions are off of 1 CC or 2 CC in which the Terran just got their 2nd CC mining, so there is an investment the Terran is putting to try to do damage to you. It's holdable, and depending on how much the T loses can put them way behind, or can put them ahead.
Exactly, all harass, depending on the skill of the attacker and preparation of the defender, can either succeed wildly, fail spectacularly, or somewhere in between. If the player dont build spores when the cloaked banshee comes and loses 30 drones, who is at the fault, the game or the player? If the player dont make turrets when the dts come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If the player does not have any stargates ready when the mutas come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If you dont scout that your opponent is going for a liberator build and prepare spores in time, you deserve to lose.
On July 24 2015 06:08 [PkF] Wire wrote: The problem with liberators is how early they can hit and dominate a mineral line when the other player cannot realistically have air units if he isn't trying to directly counter them.
Even then, I thought colossi forcing out vikings was a bad thing, and now liberators forcing air (most T players that go bio against me tell me to get air units to force the liberators to unsiege) would be a good thing ? Please. The tech requirements and timings on such strong zone control should be higher.
EDIT : big thanks to Ovid for that detailed research, I hope this opens some eyes. That kind of broken spots makes you wonder if Blizzard actually tests their stuff before patching it.
These so called "broken spots" are just as easily used by Broodlords and Tempests. In fact they existed in maps dating all the way back to Broodwar. Did you know that a common tactic for Zerg in Broodwar ZvT is to morph mutas into guardians (equivalent to SC2's broodlords) behind the terran's natural and harass the mineral line in positions unreachable by marines? According to the logic of certain posters, this would so imba that Zerg would be unbeatable!
I hope your trolling cuz nobody can be this bad right ? Or you must be a kid...
1. spores are outranged by Liberators, dont compare them to oracles or banshee cuz those units dont have 15 range 2. liberators come at 5 min in the game, broodlors come at 30+ by that time you have air units
Im forced into 2 base spire that gets me killed against any good terran because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg and the next bio push destroys you.
Ignoring your own immature troll-like comments, here is my answer:
1. Liberators cant attack buildings, so why does it matter it outranges a spore? Or maybe you suggesting that a spore's coverage is insufficient for a mineral line? Guess what, the same is also true for harass by oracles, banshees, and void rays. Are you going to complain that the spore's range is too low?
2. You are comparing apples to oranges. It is one of Terran's racial attributes to have a fast tech path. Are you suggesting all races should have the same timings for every similar unit? What would be the point of having 3 distinct races then? Lastly, any liberator rush (just like dt rushes, nydus rushes) requires the Terran to severely sacrifice his economy. It essentially is an all in and if you scout it, you either win outright or get extremely far ahead economically. You scout him building liberators and attack before he is ready, you win. You do a muta build, and pull your drones for about 30 seconds, and kill the liberators, you win.
On July 24 2015 06:41 Loccstana wrote: Ignoring your own immature troll-like comments, here is my answer:
You're so full of it. Let me address your 'argument'
On July 24 2015 06:41 Loccstana wrote: 1. Liberators cant attack buildings, so why does it matter it outranges a spore?
Uhh, maybe because Zerg NEEDS to attack the liberator regardless of whether Liberator can kill the spore or not? Otherwise, all the drones are gonna get roasted. Wow, just wow.
On July 24 2015 06:41 Loccstana wrote: 2. You are comparing apples to oranges. It is one of Terran's racial attributes to have a fast tech path.
No it's not. Terrans just enjoy a faster tech path, but there is nothing in the lore or the race design that says T should have the fastest tech path.
On July 24 2015 06:41 Loccstana wrote:What would be the point of having 3 distinct races then? Lastly, any liberator rush (just like dt rushes, nydus rushes) requires the Terran to severely sacrifice his economy. It essentially is an all in and if you scout it, you either win outright or get extremely far ahead economically. You scout him building liberators and attack before he is ready, you win. You do a muta build, and pull your drones for about 30 seconds, and kill the liberators, you win.
Oh, since Terran has the fastest tech path, let's argue all races are different. Let's take away the cloak on Ghosts and Banshees and say that only Protoss should have stealth because that's a mystical power that Humans shouldn't have. See how stupid it sounds? All 3 races don't have to be the same but when you have a massive DPS starport unit that comes out super early, you have a major problem in balance.
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.
Okay, so we've establish your disposition, lol. But we've all got a little arsehole in us, so I'll let that slide. But, I made some clear points. So, let's see if you address them ...
On July 23 2015 06:28 Ovid wrote: *snip!*
Since this is directed at me for this guys post
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 ...
I think I will explain my reasoning. The liberator doesn't require a ridiculous amount of micro to use with it's aa it's very static there's not many more tricks to it than A move or to focus fire. The ATG requires no movement or micro tricks, it just requires the person to set it up in a optimal position. Spores do not shut down the liberator as a harass based unit, on all of the maps there's a spot that the Liberator can hit one of your 3 bases mineral lines without being affected by a sporecrawler. Uprooting and rooting a spore takes 7 seconds I don't have the precise switching time for the liberator but it is substantially below that number spores are only effective in that manner in the lategame when you have more creep space to maneuver. It's a totally misguided post.
Okay, perhaps the context and essence of my post was unclear. Was it not obvious that I was primarily talking about the Air-to-Ground (ATG) mode? And also, specifically in a harass role? *shrugs* I don't think anyone is arguing that the Air-to-Air a-move requires much micro. Can we move on?
You then make this claim. Lulz. I'm almost tempted to just assume that this is not a serious rebuttal ... The lib cannot ATG and move. So, you have to move, and then activate ATG. That's micro. The ATG has an animation tell, and a huge warning marker for the opponent. Spores cannot be targeted, so are free to build and move. So, you roll in, activate these modes, maybe get a couple shots off, then you have to re-position to avoid the spore or the queen. Select > deactivate > move > reactivate target > observe what's happening > repeat. Now, imagine there is more than one?
You then make this claim. Oh, really? Is that a fact? Lulz. Are you really arguing that spores and queens do not counter the Lib harass? They do. I don't know how long it takes to deactivate ATG, move, activate ATG, and then fire one shot from the Lib, but I'm pretty sure the window when compared to an attended spore is extremely small (requiring constant micro, and basically meaning the harass will not do a lot of damage).
Can we move on?
You claim my post is "totally misguided".
The drive of my post: Lib requires lots of micro. It has an activated mode for each unit, lol, that changes attack and movement. Anyone really want to disagree that this does not constitute micro? As a harass unit the Lib requires a lot of micro, and a prepared Zerg with queens and spores will not take massive damage. This is totally misguided? I think I've said enough to at least reasonably push back on your rebuttal.
I'm open to being wrong, I just don't think I am in this argument. Maybe I am, though, Maybe someone can post the sweet spot, on all three bases, on all the maps, where even with spores and queens you cannot defend a Lib harass. *shrugs*
Allow me to elaborate on preparedness: if a Lib harass opener shows up, unscouted (which is difficult because of lings and overlords), and you do not have spores, you're going to lose the mining time it takes to build a spore, and maybe a queen if you try to fight the Lib instead of building a spore.
What league are you in HOTS and in LOTV, I'm currently writing a massive response for all the broken spots for liberators vs zerg so I will rebut your points in more detail with the general information in that, but I will say I still hold my opinion that you have no clue what you're talking about in regards to the strength of the liberator. The fact that you think 1 spore and 1 queen can stop 1 liberator is a joke.
A spore crawler is a ridiculously good counter to the liberator. So are queens, unless you literally walk into liberator range, you can easily dance around the liberator in early game lol. Most early liberator rushes with hellions are off of 1 CC or 2 CC in which the Terran just got their 2nd CC mining, so there is an investment the Terran is putting to try to do damage to you. It's holdable, and depending on how much the T loses can put them way behind, or can put them ahead.
Exactly, all harass, depending on the skill of the attacker and preparation of the defender, can either succeed wildly, fail spectacularly, or somewhere in between. If the player dont build spores when the cloaked banshee comes and loses 30 drones, who is at the fault, the game or the player? If the player dont make turrets when the dts come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If the player does not have any stargates ready when the mutas come in, who is at fault, the player or the game? If you dont scout that your opponent is going for a liberator build and prepare spores in time, you deserve to lose.
On July 24 2015 06:08 [PkF] Wire wrote: The problem with liberators is how early they can hit and dominate a mineral line when the other player cannot realistically have air units if he isn't trying to directly counter them.
Even then, I thought colossi forcing out vikings was a bad thing, and now liberators forcing air (most T players that go bio against me tell me to get air units to force the liberators to unsiege) would be a good thing ? Please. The tech requirements and timings on such strong zone control should be higher.
EDIT : big thanks to Ovid for that detailed research, I hope this opens some eyes. That kind of broken spots makes you wonder if Blizzard actually tests their stuff before patching it.
These so called "broken spots" are just as easily used by Broodlords and Tempests. In fact they existed in maps dating all the way back to Broodwar. Did you know that a common tactic for Zerg in Broodwar ZvT is to morph mutas into guardians (equivalent to SC2's broodlords) behind the terran's natural and harass the mineral line in positions unreachable by marines? According to the logic of certain posters, this would so imba that Zerg would be unbeatable!
I hope your trolling cuz nobody can be this bad right ? Or you must be a kid...
1. spores are outranged by Liberators, dont compare them to oracles or banshee cuz those units dont have 15 range 2. liberators come at 5 min in the game, broodlors come at 30+ by that time you have air units
Im forced into 2 base spire that gets me killed against any good terran because 2 base terran > 2 base zerg and the next bio push destroys you.
Ignoring your own immature troll-like comments, here is my answer:
1. Liberators cant attack buildings, so why does it matter it outranges a spore? Or maybe you suggesting that a spore's coverage is insufficient for a mineral line? Guess what, the same is also true for harass by oracles, banshees, and void rays. Are you going to complain that the spore's range is too low?
2. You are comparing apples to oranges. It is one of Terran's racial attributes to have a fast tech path. Are you suggesting all races should have the same timings for every similar unit? What would be the point of having 3 distinct races then? Lastly, any liberator rush requires the Terran to severely sacrifice his economy. It essentially is an all in and if you scout it, you either win outright or get extremely far ahead economically. You scout him building liberators and attack before he is ready, you win. You do a muta build, and pull your drones for about 30 seconds, and kill the liberators, you win.
So, in general, I don't think I like that Ovid guy much, regarding the way he handles arguments.
However, that post was very well researched, Liberators can be very very effective harassment tools in TvZ. I disagree with a lot of his opponents that bring bad arguments to the table.
I don't think it is broken so far. It is indeed a moderately expensive tech path that dies outright to baneling bust / roach bust. But I agree that it is not a good way to play a RTS. If I am Zerg and I scout an early liberator build, I shouldn't have to allin my opponent to have a chance to win.
Edit : Oh, Ovid, just read your post, you had a warning in the previous page, why do you do this to yourself?
That about sums up why I stopped playing the beta for now. Thanks for showing these pictures that really display just how much the current Liberator limits map design.
On July 24 2015 08:02 fezvez wrote: So, in general, I don't think I like that Ovid guy much, regarding the way he handles arguments.
However, that post was very well researched, Liberators can be very very effective harassment tools in TvZ. I disagree with a lot of his opponents that bring bad arguments to the table.
I don't think it is broken so far. It is indeed a moderately expensive tech path that dies outright to baneling bust / roach bust. But I agree that it is not a good way to play a RTS. If I am Zerg and I scout an early liberator build, I shouldn't have to allin my opponent to have a chance to win.
Edit : Oh, Ovid, just read your post, you had a warning in the previous page, why do you do this to yourself?
It's the internet. People don't handle arguments well here anyway, since a post isn't a perfect representation of what you want to say. At least you can correct yourself in real time face-to-face.
Uhh, maybe because Zerg NEEDS to attack the liberator regardless of whether Liberator can kill the spore or not? Otherwise, all the drones are gonna get roasted. Wow, just wow.
According to a post on Battle.net's forum, liberators themselves, in a push, is not that scary. What you have to do is to keep your units - especially the queens - out of liberators' target area and focus your fire on the hellbats, bioball or other ground forces that come along with them. Roach/Ravager/Queen/Spores will do. Meanwhile you may have your drones burrowed or pulled aside.
You do realize that both Zerg and Protoss have units that are capable of doing long range air to ground for a long time already (Broodlords, Tempest)? So far there has been no complaints about them being imba in LOTV. So what exactly is wrong that Terran gets the same kind of unit that the two other races already have? Hint: If you are losing to liberator harass (which btw requires very heavy investment down a specific tech path by terran), maybe you should make some air units such as mutas, or better yet, do counter attacks/timing attacks instead of greedily droning up to 70 workers.
Broodlords and Tempests are T3.
Trying to strictly apply a tier system to SC2 won't work. Tempests rushing and Liberator rushing are actually very similar when it comes to tech requirements when you think about it.
You do realize that both Zerg and Protoss have units that are capable of doing long range air to ground for a long time already (Broodlords, Tempest)? So far there has been no complaints about them being imba in LOTV. So what exactly is wrong that Terran gets the same kind of unit that the two other races already have? Hint: If you are losing to liberator harass (which btw requires very heavy investment down a specific tech path by terran), maybe you should make some air units such as mutas, or better yet, do counter attacks/timing attacks instead of greedily droning up to 70 workers.
Broodlords and Tempests are T3.
Trying to strictly apply a tier system to SC2 won't work. Tempests rushing and Liberator rushing are actually very similar when it comes to tech requirements when you think about it.
You can't really be serious comparing these units. Tempest DPS is so bad it's not really used as a unit. Liberator one shots hydras and has decent DPS against air.
Blizz has been throwing out broken terran units for a while: Warhound (got rekt), Cyclone and now this. If the last two feel weird is because they never had a place to being with, terran is the most complete race and their roles overlap. Cyclone should be a goliath and a valk was never needed, let alone one that is also a flying siege tank/thor. Sadly, both of them and the widow mine all overshadow the tank.
On July 24 2015 05:57 parkufarku wrote: Avilo: "Spores counter them!!! Queens are also ridiculously effective against them!"
Every non-T biased poster: "Uhhh no, Zerg actually doesnt have proper anti-air since liberators can out-range if placed in some positions, and even if you tech to Mutas, mass liberators shred mass mutas"
I don't see why you guys even bother replying to Avilo. He clearly has a Terran-based agenda
EDIT: Yes, thanks for the pictures. That should shut up the Terrans who are claiming spores are great against them.
I say that because spores do work...played many Zergs already that just put 1 spore (sometimes 2?) at the front of their base when they see it's a liberator coming to their base...and you won't do any damage versus the Zerg if they know what they're doing.
It's just like a cloak banshee...you build spores...i don't understand why some people here think building a spore crawler is bad and you autolose from building a spore or something...you guys all realize that vs cloak banshee you have to build the same amount of spores you do vs liberators...right?
On July 24 2015 05:57 parkufarku wrote: Avilo: "Spores counter them!!! Queens are also ridiculously effective against them!"
Every non-T biased poster: "Uhhh no, Zerg actually doesnt have proper anti-air since liberators can out-range if placed in some positions, and even if you tech to Mutas, mass liberators shred mass mutas"
I don't see why you guys even bother replying to Avilo. He clearly has a Terran-based agenda
EDIT: Yes, thanks for the pictures. That should shut up the Terrans who are claiming spores are great against them.
I say that because spores do work...played many Zergs already that just put 1 spore (sometimes 2?) at the front of their base when they see it's a liberator coming to their base...and you won't do any damage versus the Zerg if they know what they're doing.
It's just like a cloak banshee...you build spores...i don't understand why some people here think building a spore crawler is bad and you autolose from building a spore or something...you guys all realize that vs cloak banshee you have to build the same amount of spores you do vs liberators...right?
I totally can see the problem here. But I think it is defendable if you scout it soon enough and go for vipers.
I know this tech comes a bit later but Terran has to sacrifice a lot of eco so you can do pressure while teaching to vipers.Also important: if u react quickly you won't lose any drones you will just lose mining time. Just build hatches and transfer the drones away until you have vipers, either with Queens, spores or Hydras. they will fuck the liberators. Also vipers are so good in lotv (imbalanced?) that you can use them pretty much in every situation later and you have already the hive tech requirement.
I hope they share their thoughts about Liberators and Cyclones in an upcoming update. Both units seem lamely designed, probably too powerful/all-around, and outshine the tank that should be the core of mech play. I'd rather see the tank wildly buffed and those units nerfed than the current situation.
On July 24 2015 18:40 etsharry wrote: I totally can see the problem here. But I think it is defendable if you scout it soon enough and go for vipers.
I know this tech comes a bit later but Terran has to sacrifice a lot of eco so you can do pressure while teaching to vipers.Also important: if u react quickly you won't lose any drones you will just lose mining time. Just build hatches and transfer the drones away until you have vipers, either with Queens, spores or Hydras. they will fuck the liberators. Also vipers are so good in lotv (imbalanced?) that you can use them pretty much in every situation later and you have already the hive tech requirement.
Wait, what are you talking about, vipers against Liberator has a lategame plan, which i agree with, or Viper against what this topic is about, i.e. the two bases liberator builds?
On July 24 2015 18:40 etsharry wrote: I totally can see the problem here. But I think it is defendable if you scout it soon enough and go for vipers.
I know this tech comes a bit later but Terran has to sacrifice a lot of eco so you can do pressure while teaching to vipers.Also important: if u react quickly you won't lose any drones you will just lose mining time. Just build hatches and transfer the drones away until you have vipers, either with Queens, spores or Hydras. they will fuck the liberators. Also vipers are so good in lotv (imbalanced?) that you can use them pretty much in every situation later and you have already the hive tech requirement.
Wait, what are you talking about, vipers against Liberator has a lategame plan, which i agree with, or Viper against what this topic is about, i.e. the two bases liberator builds?
On July 24 2015 18:40 etsharry wrote: I totally can see the problem here. But I think it is defendable if you scout it soon enough and go for vipers.
I know this tech comes a bit later but Terran has to sacrifice a lot of eco so you can do pressure while teaching to vipers.Also important: if u react quickly you won't lose any drones you will just lose mining time. Just build hatches and transfer the drones away until you have vipers, either with Queens, spores or Hydras. they will fuck the liberators. Also vipers are so good in lotv (imbalanced?) that you can use them pretty much in every situation later and you have already the hive tech requirement.
Wait, what are you talking about, vipers against Liberator has a lategame plan, which i agree with, or Viper against what this topic is about, i.e. the two bases liberator builds?
Why not against 2 base? IT is fastet than mutas.
Am I understanding you correctly? Are you saying viper is faster than muta on 2 base?
On July 24 2015 18:40 etsharry wrote: I totally can see the problem here. But I think it is defendable if you scout it soon enough and go for vipers.
I know this tech comes a bit later but Terran has to sacrifice a lot of eco so you can do pressure while teaching to vipers.Also important: if u react quickly you won't lose any drones you will just lose mining time. Just build hatches and transfer the drones away until you have vipers, either with Queens, spores or Hydras. they will fuck the liberators. Also vipers are so good in lotv (imbalanced?) that you can use them pretty much in every situation later and you have already the hive tech requirement.
Wait, what are you talking about, vipers against Liberator has a lategame plan, which i agree with, or Viper against what this topic is about, i.e. the two bases liberator builds?
Why not against 2 base? IT is fastet than mutas.
Well, not at all, and it's muuuuch more expansive.
why would they be OP in TvZ? zerg has ravagers to deal with them in the early-midd game and parasitic bomb in the lategame, its protoss that needs help against liberator + mine + bio comps.
On July 24 2015 20:52 TT1 wrote: why would they be OP in TvZ? zerg has ravagers to deal with them in the early-midd game and parasitic bomb in the lategame, its protoss that needs help against liberator + mine + bio comps.
Did you go to page 8 and see the spots I posted? A liberator has enough time to unmorph before the bile hits which makes it not as effective as people are saying even more so when to be in range with the bile you have to walk into the range of the circle. Parabomb is great but it's counterable if they go for a 6 viking hit squad they can one shot the vipers not to mention that just spreading is effective, not saying para isn't very strong but it's not instawin like lots of people make out.
the ravager attack is much slower to hit than the siege/unsiege of the liberator though, so it should never hit nor prevent the liberator to fire at least a couple of time. I agree it's probably more problematic for Protoss to deal with it,
for Zerg, possible easy and small fixes would be :
* Either slight buff to the ravager spell so it takes less time, or small nerf to the liberator by increasing the siege/unsiege time. * fix the maps so there is no blind spot for the liberator, as very well illustrated by Ovid * delay the timing of it. Maybe not revert to the tech lab to research the AtG attack, but make an armury requirement to be able to build the liberator?
Yeah, armory requirment for the liberator sounds like a really good solution. Then we can see how the liberator works without 2/3 TvZs currently being decided by liberator rushes.
On July 24 2015 23:18 mantequilla wrote: Why is the same build not effective vs P? Because of phoenix?
Without being a TvP expert, Id say that the hellbat build is bad in TvP for various reasons. It dies to an oracle (cuts marines for reactored hellions), the hellion/hellbat part is easily shut down by MsC/Stalker and probably adepts as well and for anti air protoss can have phoenix/VR in time (which seems to be popular anyways due to cyclones) and photon overcharge and stalkers are probably quite a bit better against Liberators than the creepreliant and slower queen/spore combo. I guess against non stargate builds you can still abuse those siege locations from page 8 though, but I guess that comes down to scouting. Whether there are different strong liberator pushes or plays in that matchup Idk but to be honest I would be surprised if protoss players werent struggeling a bit against this unit too at the moment. In particular since they are enforced to play adeptheavy which provides less antiair and since liberators counter phoenixes in the bigger numbers (i guess. Havent tested it but the stats look like they work out that way)
On July 24 2015 06:11 Loccstana wrote: These so called "broken spots" are just as easily used by Broodlords and Tempests. In fact they existed in maps dating all the way back to Broodwar. Did you know that a common tactic for Zerg in Broodwar ZvT is to morph mutas into guardians (equivalent to SC2's broodlords) behind the terran's natural and harass the mineral line in positions unreachable by marines? According to the logic of certain posters, this would so imba that Zerg would be unbeatable!
Lol if the zerg has guardians then the terran has science vessels. And guardians are not the equivalent of broodlords.
On July 24 2015 20:52 TT1 wrote: why would they be OP in TvZ? zerg has ravagers to deal with them in the early-midd game and parasitic bomb in the lategame, its protoss that needs help against liberator + mine + bio comps.
I don't think Protoss needs help -Protoss actually feels like a much more interesting race in LotV-, I think Liberator needs nerfs. And Cyclone needs a nerf to the number of dots it produces, ridiculous.
It took me one game to realize that the liberator was a stupid as fuck unit. Anyone with any experience in tvz should be able to realize that countering liberators makes you completely vulnerable to every followup terran has, as well as puts you behind in economy. Glad to know that there's a dozen plus spots where the liberator is untouchable during the timeframe where it is strongest.
Honestly none of the new units added makes the game better, it feels it's just cause they must add two units to sell a new expansion so they just randomly creates new units... Lurker too strong vs ground, ravagers just average designed, same for adept, disruptor just literally a deathball lol, cyclon/liberator just too strong/uninteresting.
A real balance patch for HOTS would have been way better than the actual direction of LOTV . and honestly it seems way too late now for hoping they can fix the game in this beta, when remaking more than half of the new units seems to be needed.
On July 25 2015 06:04 Tyrhanius wrote: Honestly none of the new units added makes the game better, it feels it's just cause they must add two units to sell a new expansion so they just randomly creates new units... Lurker too strong vs ground, ravagers just average designed, same for adept, disruptor just literally a deathball lol, cyclon/liberator just too strong/uninteresting.
A real balance patch for HOTS would have been way better than the actual direction of LOTV . and honestly it seems way too late now for hoping they can fix the game in this beta, when remaking more than half of the new units seems to be needed.
That is because of the retarded design the game was built on. It is only natural that the new units will be mess and not doing the necessary job because the already units in the game is in a messy state. They needed to fix everything design wise before things become clear on what parts each race lacks and add units to fill those missing roles.
On July 24 2015 21:42 Vanadiel wrote: the ravager attack is much slower to hit than the siege/unsiege of the liberator though, so it should never hit nor prevent the liberator to fire at least a couple of time. I agree it's probably more problematic for Protoss to deal with it,
for Zerg, possible easy and small fixes would be :
* Either slight buff to the ravager spell so it takes less time, or small nerf to the liberator by increasing the siege/unsiege time. * fix the maps so there is no blind spot for the liberator, as very well illustrated by Ovid * delay the timing of it. Maybe not revert to the tech lab to research the AtG attack, but make an armury requirement to be able to build the liberator?
Or you could just nerf the OP unit instead of messing with a balanced unit used in response to the OP unit.
On July 24 2015 20:52 TT1 wrote: why would they be OP in TvZ? zerg has ravagers to deal with them in the early-midd game and parasitic bomb in the lategame, its protoss that needs help against liberator + mine + bio comps.
Did you go to page 8 and see the spots I posted? A liberator has enough time to unmorph before the bile hits which makes it not as effective as people are saying even more so when to be in range with the bile you have to walk into the range of the circle. Parabomb is great but it's counterable if they go for a 6 viking hit squad they can one shot the vipers not to mention that just spreading is effective, not saying para isn't very strong but it's not instawin like lots of people make out.
On July 24 2015 20:52 TT1 wrote: why would they be OP in TvZ? zerg has ravagers to deal with them in the early-midd game and parasitic bomb in the lategame, its protoss that needs help against liberator + mine + bio comps.
Did you go to page 8 and see the spots I posted? A liberator has enough time to unmorph before the bile hits which makes it not as effective as people are saying even more so when to be in range with the bile you have to walk into the range of the circle. Parabomb is great but it's counterable if they go for a 6 viking hit squad they can one shot the vipers not to mention that just spreading is effective, not saying para isn't very strong but it's not instawin like lots of people make out.
uhh, no they dont
Uhh yes they do, bile takes 2.5 seconds and the unmorph is 1 second. To demonstrate here's it in action
The liberator in its current form is a bit flawed from a Zergs perspective.
The biggest problem is that it is virtually impossible to even cross their siege range, I am not even talking about fighting in it. This leads to several problems in different game stages: Early game - very map depending. On some maps it is quite easy to hold liberator harrass with no preparation, just by smartly positioning queens. On some other maps (huge airspace behind bases), it is virtually impossible to even prevent them from setting up with ravagers (the hard counter to small amounts of liberators, imo), tons of queens or a network of spores. This means that a terran going for liberator early on usually results in an akward situation - zerg being lucky and catching the liberator on his way to sieging up, therefore taking no damage and getting miles ahead due to the terran wasting so many ressources and tech on it. Or - terran being lucky and getting the liberator up and preventing mining in a whole mineral line. There is no skill involved, since both parties cannot actually do a lot, it just depends on the terran being lucky and avoiding defense until setup or the zerg being lucky and having the defense at the right place. Furthermore, there is no real counter and no real value of this thing. It is an air unit but just smashes Zergs airborne anti air units. In addition, it kills everything on the ground. If it is in the wrong mode, however, it goes down in an instant due to being a glas cannon and stacking while moving, since it is an air unit. This means that both the player using it and the player trying to stop it have to rely on being sneaky and gimmicky. And the worst thing is - have some of those things, some PFs, turrets, mines and tanks and you have the ultimate defense line. Mech terran vs. Zerg currently means turtling on 3 bases, massing Liberators and Cyclones and then slowly turtling from base to base. ZvM on hots was way more fun if you ask me.
Even from P's perspective, the Liberator is too strong. The amount of zone control it provides when in high enough numbers is just ridiculous, and on some maps there are crazy broken spots that you can't defend if you don't have air units. With proper support they just choke you and you can't hope to win.
The radius needs to be smaller, the DPS less ludicrous. I hope the Liberator and, less urgent, the Cyclone and its thousands of dots get addressed in the upcoming community update. "Mech" (had to put that in quotes, what comes out of factory/starport is not necessarily mech) in LotV has become something really ugly.
On July 27 2015 04:33 GGzerG wrote: Liberators are so easy to deal with, 4 ravenger shots gg
I think this is trolling. Even if its killed, its only 150 gas 150 mins. Can be reactored. Not GG for the rushing player in any case.
--
Hello TL,
How does one even deal with 1 base rushed Liberators as Z? What can hit the dead space?
Also, what is with this unit. It doesn't fill any problem spots. It's super powerful. Its overlaps the Banshees place for much better. It can be reactored. Doesn't require a tech lab. Costs only 150 gas 150 mins. WHAT? I mean, they were ok, cool, tough to get with the tech lab research requirement. Now? Every terran I meet goes 1 base Liberators, expands in base, and laughs all day.
On July 27 2015 03:41 [PkF] Wire wrote: Even from P's perspective, the Liberator is too strong. The amount of zone control it provides when in high enough numbers is just ridiculous, and on some maps there are crazy broken spots that you can't defend if you don't have air units. With proper support they just choke you and you can't hope to win.
The radius needs to be smaller, the DPS less ludicrous. I hope the Liberator and, less urgent, the Cyclone and its thousands of dots get addressed in the upcoming community update. "Mech" (had to put that in quotes, what comes out of factory/starport is not necessarily mech) in LotV has become something really ugly.
While you are at it, you should also suggest reducing their health, speed, base armor (-1), sieging and unsieging time, just to be fair.
And mech is factory units, it used to be mainly siege tank because that was the main unit from there, and they had air support from vikings. Now it extends to cyclones/tanks with libe support. Having mainly units from the starport is skyterran, not mech. Mass raven viking is skyterran, not mech, but it transitions from mech usually. There are also viable hybrid comps now where you get almost as many liberators than tanks or cyclones, anyway terran armies are amongst the most diverse in LoTV so far while P and Z usually mass the same single unit; this is imo why they are complaining so much because they expect to beat a mixed composition by producing a single unit composition.
I wouldn't mind having the air to ground upgrade comeb ack for the liberator, its main strength comes from how early it can get out. Also a smarter nerf would be to set the distance between the liberator and its zone so that the cases shown in page 8 can't happen. It's fine if hydra/stalker/queens are outranged but there shouldn't be spots where a libe can harass a line and no turret placement can reach the libe. And libe are expensive enough that you can respond with similar numbers of canons/spores without getting behind, so stop being greedy.
If you really think about it this whole scenario is going to be completely map dependent.... as to not only when you can use a liberator but how effective it can be used. In tvz thor vs muta before magic boxing was seen as a hard impossible slaughter counter LOL then magic boxing came into play and muta s became all the more deadly. So there is going to be an evolution of muta vs liberator and timings that will evolve around the liberator based off of map and such much like blink has evolved around maps along MSC vision nerf. So we might see some type of broken combination along with the liberator but I don't think blizzard is going to sit back seeing how this is seriously DK's baby...
Though I will say the power of the liberator is going to be completely determined by the map and zerg's reaction....
I guess soon its AA splash will be reduced but with some extra anti-light damage, so you could counter them with corruptors or void rays. It's designed as a kryptonite to muta and phoenix while vikings handle the armored air units, right?
maybe just decreasing the range of the liberator by a bit will help. That way they are more defensive zoning while siege tanks can actually push forward. RIght now, liberators parking shots over mineral lines can't be defended against with spores. The spores just can't reach. That is a problem. If the range was reduced they'd be more vulnerable if they werent covered by tanks, less massable since they need synergy with tanks, and more counterable with hydras. Also, vipers can be a decent counter to the pressure if you make it there. And massing air units... this is why the viper has its new ability.
Just played another game where he went fast liberator while I was macroing... I still don't know what's the best answer to that. I mean if you want to play ravagers, meaning fast gas and skip speed / lair / whatever you can think of, then sure you "may" be able to defend. But still absurd because u'd need to attack exactly when he's "sieging" so that he won't be espacing. Not to mention there could be 2 liberators... Really annoying.
I'm more so struggling with Liberators in the later macro game stages, beefy, good air attack, and the radius on the ground thing is utterly absurd combined with tanks and planetaries, you simply cannot attack into a Terran army period.
Liberator ground mode and Parasitic Bomb both need a good smackin with the nerf bat, this isn't a learn to play issue like the Lurkers, these abilities are just stupid strong.
I think everything about Liberator is okay right now except for it comes out pretty fast. Imo the research for AG mode should be a requirement again. Just did a build like 1base 1-1-1 + armory then put 1 liberator on each Z base and he cant do anything anymore.
On July 29 2015 11:10 shin_toss wrote: I think everything about Liberator is okay right now except for it comes out pretty fast. Imo the research for AG mode should be a requirement again. Just did a build like 1base 1-1-1 + armory then put 1 liberator on each Z base and he cant do anything anymore.
It shouldn't be too good against corruptor. At least not without a large number. If there's no such changes, perhaps ravager's shot would get a longer range, then the problem is solved.
On July 29 2015 11:10 shin_toss wrote: I think everything about Liberator is okay right now except for it comes out pretty fast. Imo the research for AG mode should be a requirement again. Just did a build like 1base 1-1-1 + armory then put 1 liberator on each Z base and he cant do anything anymore.
It shouldn't be too good against corruptor. At least not without a large number. If there's no such changes, perhaps ravager's shot would get a longer range, then the problem is solved.
The range of the ravager is not the problem in my opinion, more the time for the attack to hit.
On July 29 2015 10:12 jpg06051992 wrote: I'm more so struggling with Liberators in the later macro game stages, beefy, good air attack, and the radius on the ground thing is utterly absurd combined with tanks and planetaries, you simply cannot attack into a Terran army period.
Liberator ground mode and Parasitic Bomb both need a good smackin with the nerf bat, this isn't a learn to play issue like the Lurkers, these abilities are just stupid strong.
I've had some success against liberator / cyclone heavy comps with broodlord / corruptor / viper / queen. DIfficult to get to the comp but strong when you get it.
On July 29 2015 10:12 jpg06051992 wrote: I'm more so struggling with Liberators in the later macro game stages, beefy, good air attack, and the radius on the ground thing is utterly absurd combined with tanks and planetaries, you simply cannot attack into a Terran army period.
Liberator ground mode and Parasitic Bomb both need a good smackin with the nerf bat, this isn't a learn to play issue like the Lurkers, these abilities are just stupid strong.
I've had some success against liberator / cyclone heavy comps with broodlord / corruptor / viper / queen. DIfficult to get to the comp but strong when you get it.
yeah sorry but liberator / cyclones comes out a lot earlier than broodlord / corrupter / vipers
cyclones and WMs were bad enough, now comes another ridiculously broken Terran unit.
Can someone remind me why T needed another new unit when Zerg only has 10?
On July 29 2015 10:12 jpg06051992 wrote: I'm more so struggling with Liberators in the later macro game stages, beefy, good air attack, and the radius on the ground thing is utterly absurd combined with tanks and planetaries, you simply cannot attack into a Terran army period.
Liberator ground mode and Parasitic Bomb both need a good smackin with the nerf bat, this isn't a learn to play issue like the Lurkers, these abilities are just stupid strong.
I've had some success against liberator / cyclone heavy comps with broodlord / corruptor / viper / queen. DIfficult to get to the comp but strong when you get it.
yeah sorry but liberator / cyclones comes out a lot earlier than broodlord / corrupter / vipers
cyclones and WMs were bad enough, now comes another ridiculously broken Terran unit.
Can someone remind me why T needed another new unit when Zerg only has 10?
Oh, come on, every hatchery and lair unit except muta can morph into something else! The amount is far more than 10.
On July 29 2015 10:12 jpg06051992 wrote: I'm more so struggling with Liberators in the later macro game stages, beefy, good air attack, and the radius on the ground thing is utterly absurd combined with tanks and planetaries, you simply cannot attack into a Terran army period.
Liberator ground mode and Parasitic Bomb both need a good smackin with the nerf bat, this isn't a learn to play issue like the Lurkers, these abilities are just stupid strong.
I've had some success against liberator / cyclone heavy comps with broodlord / corruptor / viper / queen. DIfficult to get to the comp but strong when you get it.
yeah sorry but liberator / cyclones comes out a lot earlier than broodlord / corrupter / vipers
cyclones and WMs were bad enough, now comes another ridiculously broken Terran unit.
Can someone remind me why T needed another new unit when Zerg only has 10?
Yeah I try to find an attack to transition into it. Depends on map and what he's building.. generally if he's building liberators / cyclone / other units without sufficient tank support a mass hydra attack does very well.
Faced a Terran that opened up blue flame hellion/lib before going into tanks and thors.
The result is an almost impossible to engage mech army that can and will sit outside your base. While I feel that if you micro the situation perfectly then it's manageable that's the case for literally everything in SC2 and doesn't really mean anything.
The zoning potential is insane with the lib which imo is the biggest issue.
On July 30 2015 18:43 Buddy168 wrote: Faced a Terran that opened up blue flame hellion/lib before going into tanks and thors.
The result is an almost impossible to engage mech army that can and will sit outside your base. While I feel that if you micro the situation perfectly then it's manageable that's the case for literally everything in SC2 and doesn't really mean anything.
The zoning potential is insane with the lib which imo is the biggest issue.
The problem is that the tech is to early and to powerful. Why would anyone make a banshee now when you have Liberators... i dont know.
On July 30 2015 18:43 Buddy168 wrote: Faced a Terran that opened up blue flame hellion/lib before going into tanks and thors.
The result is an almost impossible to engage mech army that can and will sit outside your base. While I feel that if you micro the situation perfectly then it's manageable that's the case for literally everything in SC2 and doesn't really mean anything.
The zoning potential is insane with the lib which imo is the biggest issue.
The problem is that the tech is to early and to powerful. Why would anyone make a banshee now when you have Liberators... i dont know.
Uh ... for cloak, the ability to attack buildings - and the potential to fly fast upon the speed upgrade? Besides, the tech is not early. You still need armory to unlock the AG mode, so that basically puts the liberator and the banshee on the same tech level as both need one building to unlock.
On July 30 2015 18:43 Buddy168 wrote: Faced a Terran that opened up blue flame hellion/lib before going into tanks and thors.
The result is an almost impossible to engage mech army that can and will sit outside your base. While I feel that if you micro the situation perfectly then it's manageable that's the case for literally everything in SC2 and doesn't really mean anything.
The zoning potential is insane with the lib which imo is the biggest issue.
The problem is that the tech is to early and to powerful. Why would anyone make a banshee now when you have Liberators... i dont know.
Uh ... for cloak, the ability to attack buildings - and the potential to fly fast upon the speed upgrade? Besides, the tech is not early. You still need armory to unlock the AG mode, so that basically puts the liberator and the banshee on the same tech level as both need one building to unlock.
Have you seen a banshee since Liberator ? Liberators does more damage with the hellbats, since queens are zoned out. That early on you want to kill economy not buildings. Its at 5 min, its really early even QxC admited the tech is to early.
Banshee might be relevant after the upgrade at fusion core, its a maybe, but still teching to that when you can mass liberators, its a crazy ideea not worth doing it when ultralisk is so powerful in the late game.
No matter how you look at it... Liberator is to OP it needs tweaking and a research upgrade for the AG. If they stay at this tech they will get huge nerfs in the DPS and other areas... and it would kill the idea of having a strong siege unit.
On July 30 2015 18:43 Buddy168 wrote: Faced a Terran that opened up blue flame hellion/lib before going into tanks and thors.
The result is an almost impossible to engage mech army that can and will sit outside your base. While I feel that if you micro the situation perfectly then it's manageable that's the case for literally everything in SC2 and doesn't really mean anything.
The zoning potential is insane with the lib which imo is the biggest issue.
The problem is that the tech is to early and to powerful. Why would anyone make a banshee now when you have Liberators... i dont know.
Uh ... for cloak, the ability to attack buildings - and the potential to fly fast upon the speed upgrade? Besides, the tech is not early. You still need armory to unlock the AG mode, so that basically puts the liberator and the banshee on the same tech level as both need one building to unlock.
Have you seen a banshee since Liberator ? Liberators does more damage with the hellbats, since queens are zoned out. That early one you want to kill economy not buildings. Its at 5 min, its really early even QxC admited the tech is to early.
Banshee might be relevant after the upgrade at fusion core, its a maybe, but still teching to that when you can mass liberators, its a crazy ideea not worth doing it when ultralisk is so powerful in the late game.
No matter how you look at it... Liberator is to OP it needs tweaking and a research upgrade for the AG. If they stay at this tech they will get huge nerfs in the DPS and other areas... and it would kill the idea of having a strong siege unit.
Well, perhaps its AA attack will be nerfed so they can be countered by corruptors and voidrays, but the AG mode will stay the same. Nonetheless its AG mode gets buffed in the latest patch, which is not likely be undone.
On July 30 2015 18:43 Buddy168 wrote: Faced a Terran that opened up blue flame hellion/lib before going into tanks and thors.
The result is an almost impossible to engage mech army that can and will sit outside your base. While I feel that if you micro the situation perfectly then it's manageable that's the case for literally everything in SC2 and doesn't really mean anything.
The zoning potential is insane with the lib which imo is the biggest issue.
The problem is that the tech is to early and to powerful. Why would anyone make a banshee now when you have Liberators... i dont know.
Uh ... for cloak, the ability to attack buildings - and the potential to fly fast upon the speed upgrade? Besides, the tech is not early. You still need armory to unlock the AG mode, so that basically puts the liberator and the banshee on the same tech level as both need one building to unlock.
Have you seen a banshee since Liberator ? Liberators does more damage with the hellbats, since queens are zoned out. That early one you want to kill economy not buildings. Its at 5 min, its really early even QxC admited the tech is to early.
Banshee might be relevant after the upgrade at fusion core, its a maybe, but still teching to that when you can mass liberators, its a crazy ideea not worth doing it when ultralisk is so powerful in the late game.
No matter how you look at it... Liberator is to OP it needs tweaking and a research upgrade for the AG. If they stay at this tech they will get huge nerfs in the DPS and other areas... and it would kill the idea of having a strong siege unit.
Well, perhaps its AA attack will be nerfed so they can be countered by corruptors and voidrays, but the AG mode will stay the same. Nonetheless its AG mode gets buffed in the latest patch, which is not likely be undone.
Its not about counters, they have counters but they are not as early as them. AG can stay as it is only if its later in the game.
It 1 shots hydra man at 5 min in the game, think about that and look in this thread, someone posted places that you can use dead space so early on to kill mineral lines without the enemy being able to do anything.... making static D useless
Remember when cyclones forced protoss go stargate every game... its the same thing... 2 base muta all day.
On August 01 2015 09:21 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: third time with TvT finalls, clearly T is balanced and Liberator and Cyclone is okay http://www.twitch.tv/redbullesports
On August 01 2015 09:21 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: third time with TvT finalls, clearly T is balanced and Liberator and Cyclone is okay http://www.twitch.tv/redbullesports
Wrong, two times.
I hope you're speaking as if it wasn't sarcasm for ZLS1. The liberator is a band aid, there's better ways about changing mech and giving terran more effective strategies than turtle mech and bio, the liberator is not it.
On August 01 2015 09:21 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: third time with TvT finalls, clearly T is balanced and Liberator and Cyclone is okay http://www.twitch.tv/redbullesports
Wrong, two times.
So T is imbalanced and Liberators and Cyclones need changes ?
To be honest I think Liberators and Cyclones need tweaks. Liberator tech hits too early IMO and bio + liberator is incredibly strong vs P. I guess it shouldn't be reactorable and an upgrade at tech lab could help. The cyclone just feels too all-around and massable once it has upgraded air, I think its ground weapon should be fairly weak to leave some place for a maybe buffed tank.
Faced a double starport opening. where he just kept sending more and more Liberators, I basically tried to just keep up queen production and get spores. while I tried pressuring back with bane/ling. Now, we were both weak players but it felt ridiculous, I trashed his economy a number of times but never enough to finish the game and he just kept making more and more liberators to the point nothing, and I do mean nothing will be able to kill them. I truly wonder how does zerg deal with 10+ liberators. Infestors will never get close enough, mutas and even corruptors are a joke, hydras are so bad it's not even funny. Occasionally he would suicide a few to clean up my mining lines. I'm obviously not good enough to give a final judgment, but it seems OP as hell.
On August 02 2015 19:13 IcemanAsi wrote: Faced a double starport opening. where he just kept sending more and more Liberators, I basically tried to just keep up queen production and get spores. while I tried pressuring back with bane/ling. Now, we were both weak players but it felt ridiculous, I trashed his economy a number of times but never enough to finish the game and he just kept making more and more liberators to the point nothing, and I do mean nothing will be able to kill them. I truly wonder how does zerg deal with 10+ liberators. Infestors will never get close enough, mutas and even corruptors are a joke, hydras are so bad it's not even funny. Occasionally he would suicide a few to clean up my mining lines. I'm obviously not good enough to give a final judgment, but it seems OP as hell.
"Make more spores and queens"
"Queens are amazing anti-air fighting units with their massive DPS"
On August 01 2015 09:21 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: third time with TvT finalls, clearly T is balanced and Liberator and Cyclone is okay http://www.twitch.tv/redbullesports
Wrong, two times.
Yep my bad its 2 times, but i have a feeling it will be the 3 TvT finals.
Also i saw your matches vs nerchio and railgan.
You threw the games vs nerchio just because it was lycan league just to make people think liberators is okay but you smashed railgan on ladder with the same strategy.
On August 01 2015 09:21 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: third time with TvT finalls, clearly T is balanced and Liberator and Cyclone is okay http://www.twitch.tv/redbullesports
Wrong, two times.
Yep my bad its 2 times, but i have a feeling it will be the 3 TvT finals.
Also i saw your matches vs nerchio and railgan.
You threw the games vs nerchio just because it was lycan league just to make people think liberators is okay but you smashed railgan on ladder with the same strategy.
On July 30 2015 18:43 Buddy168 wrote: Faced a Terran that opened up blue flame hellion/lib before going into tanks and thors.
The result is an almost impossible to engage mech army that can and will sit outside your base. While I feel that if you micro the situation perfectly then it's manageable that's the case for literally everything in SC2 and doesn't really mean anything.
The zoning potential is insane with the lib which imo is the biggest issue.
"The problem is that the tech is to early and to powerful. Why would anyone make a banshee now when you have Liberators... i dont know."
Both of these statements are true, the Liberator is an awesome unit design wise but it's totally obvious that Blizzard over buffed it so it would see use.
Much like the Lurker, it's time to start dialing back these super powerful beta units until they have a strong but balanced place in the metagame.
Liberators have absolutely no cons, only pros, great against air, great synergy with Siege Tanks, can snipe a Queen in 2 shots, fantastic with Hellbats (these pushes hit so fast and so strong that I'm kinda left scratching my head in alot of cases)
Good units still need to have cons, the Liberator needs to come out later or be tech lab only on Starport with a nerf to it's radius thing on the ground mode, the Siege Tank of the air shouldn't outshine the Siege Tank on the ground.
On July 30 2015 18:43 Buddy168 wrote: Faced a Terran that opened up blue flame hellion/lib before going into tanks and thors.
The result is an almost impossible to engage mech army that can and will sit outside your base. While I feel that if you micro the situation perfectly then it's manageable that's the case for literally everything in SC2 and doesn't really mean anything.
The zoning potential is insane with the lib which imo is the biggest issue.
"The problem is that the tech is to early and to powerful. Why would anyone make a banshee now when you have Liberators... i dont know."
The liberator and the banshee have two different roles and strengths. The combination of evoless spores, the economy changes, and the meta/balance in legacy discourages early banshee use in the matchup.
On July 30 2015 18:43 Buddy168 wrote: Faced a Terran that opened up blue flame hellion/lib before going into tanks and thors.
The result is an almost impossible to engage mech army that can and will sit outside your base. While I feel that if you micro the situation perfectly then it's manageable that's the case for literally everything in SC2 and doesn't really mean anything.
The zoning potential is insane with the lib which imo is the biggest issue.
"The problem is that the tech is to early and to powerful. Why would anyone make a banshee now when you have Liberators... i dont know."
The liberator and the banshee have two different roles and strengths. The combination of evoless spores, the economy changes, and the meta/balance in legacy discourages early banshee use in the matchup.
Not really both banshee and liberator have the same roles, to do the economic damage the problem is a Liberator is 10x times better on harassing then a banshee, and way stronger with hellbats.
Thus no one would make banshee.
The only reason you would make a banshee is when you get the speed upgrade way latter in the game, but even then massing liberators is a better idea.
On August 01 2015 09:21 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: third time with TvT finalls, clearly T is balanced and Liberator and Cyclone is okay http://www.twitch.tv/redbullesports
Wrong, two times.
Yep my bad its 2 times, but i have a feeling it will be the 3 TvT finals.
Also i saw your matches vs nerchio and railgan.
You threw the games vs nerchio just because it was lycan league just to make people think liberators is okay but you smashed railgan on ladder with the same strategy.
ZergLingShepherd1, your posts really confuse me bro. No offense, but nothing you say about balance in here makes even basic common sense, do you even read what you type? You seriously telling people that they're throwing games to influence game balance? Something that can be easily altered at any time in the future by blizzard once they've collected a huge amount of data once the game goes live?
The beta meta (ha pun) is just too volatile to make most design tweaks you're inferring. It's the reason we now have underpowered seige tanks, people in wings beta just didn't understand that the beautiful thing about starcraft, particularly brood war, was that the game more or less balanced itself, with VERY little input from blizzard. The liberator, for example, seems to be fixed in an economic damage context by map design opening up the space behind minerals more to allow a spore/cannon/turret to be placed within range of a lib at max range on a mineral line.
On August 01 2015 09:21 ZergLingShepherd1 wrote: third time with TvT finalls, clearly T is balanced and Liberator and Cyclone is okay http://www.twitch.tv/redbullesports
On August 15 2015 09:29 AdrianHealeyy wrote: Liberator is strong, but ravagers seem to counter it thus far (at my level.)
Although, given liberators, I am a bit puzzled by why anyone would open banshee. Is there any situation where banshee is stronger than liberator?
There is no reason for banshee since you are looking for drone kills not destroying a hatch at 5 min mark. Also the problem is that no matter what, your behind even if you defend liberator.... also liberator + cyclone is just broken.
I'm a 100% mech player in all match ups (high diamond right now, ex masters), with over 300 games played this season. I think that some timing attacks will be too strong vs Zerg, especially if they don't pick the right comp, so I'd say the only real place Liberators are OP is early game. Maybe it should be an armory requirement plus a cheap research that takes some time for the ground attack. I'd like them to still be able to be made just as fast, since muta's usually are arriving in my base when I have 2 of them, and the AA is fine, it's the ground attack that comes out early.
I just hope they don't remove the splash dmg vs air, right now besides some lucky mines this is the only unit I think Terran has vs mass carriers (and you need critical mass).
TL:DR I think they are fine, but I could live with them changing the ground attack to be about 1 minute later. They are really powerful but they have lots of weak spots.
On August 16 2015 01:43 DooMDash wrote: I'm a 100% mech player in all match ups (high diamond right now, ex masters), with over 300 games played this season. I think that some timing attacks will be too strong vs Zerg, especially if they don't pick the right comp, so I'd say the only real place Liberators are OP is early game. Maybe it should be an armory requirement plus a cheap research that takes some time for the ground attack. I'd like them to still be able to be made just as fast, since muta's usually are arriving in my base when I have 2 of them, and the AA is fine, it's the ground attack that comes out early.
I just hope they don't remove the splash dmg vs air, right now besides some lucky mines this is the only unit I think Terran has vs mass carriers (and you need critical mass).
TL:DR I think they are fine, but I could live with them changing the ground attack to be about 1 minute later. They are really powerful but they have lots of weak spots.
Design wise liberator is okay.... the problem is the ground damage is to much and they are to early. Like qxc said it... its like having tanks at barracks... its way to early.
The Liberator problem is that its a reactored unit, that comes to early. Very easy to mass, not that expensive.
An easy fix would be to town down the AG mode, since 80 damage or more in 1 shot is not good design and make this unit be at tech lab... with a simple research to get the AG mode.
Some minor quality of life changes that I'd really like to see would be 1. The radius of the target field stays the same, but it is displayed as being .1 or .2 larger than it really is. There are a lot of cases where it looks like a unit isn't actually within the circle, but then it gets fired upon anyway, and I think the margin of ambiguity should fall upon units not getting obliterated when it looks like they shouldn't be. 2. The Liberator fires before it looks like the targeting circle is done animating. The animation should be sped up a fraction of a second. 3. Similarly, units can run surprisingly far out of the circle and still get hit by a shot. I think the attack animation should commence slightly quicker, and if units escape the circle before a certain point in the animation (maybe the "standard" damage point of .167?), the attack animation should be canceled or forced to retarget to a different unit within the circle.
I am a zerg on diamond level and Liberators completely wreck me. I am not speaking off mass LIberators, but just about 7-8 in addition to a standard bio army. They hard counter everything I do. First of all, they bust everything on the ground. Banelings and lurkers (which are supposed to be the answer to bio) can't do anything, they will just die if they attack. But even air units are not the answer. First of all, Liberators do surprisingly well against air, and secondly, well they are backed up by mass marines, so you can't just go muta. Also Parasitic bomb can't be the answer because it is just an overcommitment of ressources just for a few Liberators.
On August 27 2015 03:57 parkufarku wrote: Any updates on future nerfs to this unit? I'm surprised they didn't address it in the recent community announcement
I was surprised too. It obviously hits far too early (and far too hard if you ask me). Huge toning down is to be expected.
how about having the liberator anti-ground require fusion core instead of armory, and having the banshee speed upgrade require armory instead of fusion core? would that balance those two units out?
On August 28 2015 02:55 summerloud wrote: how about having the liberator anti-ground require fusion core instead of armory, and having the banshee speed upgrade require armory instead of fusion core? would that balance those two units out?
there are two major complaints: it comes too early, and it is too powerful for its cost
fusion core would be the first correct step but would only address the early timing of the unit. i think hard numbers would have to be tweaked for this unit to make any sense, or else we will see warhound 2.0
On July 30 2015 18:43 Buddy168 wrote: Faced a Terran that opened up blue flame hellion/lib before going into tanks and thors.
The result is an almost impossible to engage mech army that can and will sit outside your base. While I feel that if you micro the situation perfectly then it's manageable that's the case for literally everything in SC2 and doesn't really mean anything.
The zoning potential is insane with the lib which imo is the biggest issue.
"The problem is that the tech is to early and to powerful. Why would anyone make a banshee now when you have Liberators... i dont know."
The liberator and the banshee have two different roles and strengths. The combination of evoless spores, the economy changes, and the meta/balance in legacy discourages early banshee use in the matchup.
Actually it promotes early banshee use with Liberator, as the Banshee hardcounters Roach and Ravager with proper micro.
On August 28 2015 00:57 MapleLeafSirup wrote: I am a zerg on diamond level and Liberators completely wreck me. I am not speaking off mass LIberators, but just about 7-8 in addition to a standard bio army. They hard counter everything I do. First of all, they bust everything on the ground. Banelings and lurkers (which are supposed to be the answer to bio) can't do anything, they will just die if they attack. But even air units are not the answer. First of all, Liberators do surprisingly well against air, and secondly, well they are backed up by mass marines, so you can't just go muta. Also Parasitic bomb can't be the answer because it is just an overcommitment of ressources just for a few Liberators.
Definitely something I have noticed lately, no matter what comp the Liberator is in it's just broken, it's so broken with tanks and Cyclones it makes the game just not very fun, Liberators come out so fast and so early that you kind of have to commit o a blind counter or if you get caught off guard you will lose your drone lines.
Liberators not only need to come out a bit later, I feel they also need a wee bit of a nerf, because while the unit is well designed, it just overshadows the Tank waay too much, Tanks should be buffed back to a useful in siege mode state, especially with how bad the new Marauder is and how strong Ultralisks are, there doesn't seem to be a reason that the siege tank isn't the primary space holder and the Liberator merely a support.
Liberator
- Requires Techlab
- 10 % ground mode radius decrease (numbers can always be tuned)
I don't think with these nerfs it wouldn't be awesome to build, they deal with Mutalisk flocks very handily and provide a great buffer for Vikings to gun down Corruptors. And even nerfed it's ground mode is still way better damage wise then Viking ground mode.
The problem is that its reactored, with early AG that does 85 dmg, and has a long range. Basically its like the old Cyclone... to well round... way to broken.
The Liberator is really annoying to play against. The fact it can hide out of range ( you can't hit it ) but it can hit your mineral line is ridiculous, this needs to be INSTA PATCHED. So Silly
No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
I still dont know how is this unit avoiding a nerf ?
I mean even Terran player like QxC admited that Liberators are to early, like siege tank on barracks.
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
I still dont know how is this unit avoiding a nerf ?
I mean even Terran player like QxC admited that Liberators are to early, like siege tank on barracks.
because there is an army of Terran fanboys who refuse to admit it's a broken unit, and advocate against anything that might nerf the race
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
I still dont know how is this unit avoiding a nerf ?
I mean even Terran player like QxC admited that Liberators are to early, like siege tank on barracks.
because there is an army of Terran fanboys who refuse to admit it's a broken unit, and advocate against anything that might nerf the race
As if terran needs any kind of nerf compared to the other two races in the game's current state....
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
I still dont know how is this unit avoiding a nerf ?
I mean even Terran player like QxC admited that Liberators are to early, like siege tank on barracks.
because there is an army of Terran fanboys who refuse to admit it's a broken unit, and advocate against anything that might nerf the race
As if terran needs any kind of nerf compared to the other two races in the game's current state....
Actually yes, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that 85 damage on any unit, let alone a unit that can zone a "circle of death" behind your mineral line that is almost literally untouchable, is in fact imbalanced.
Appearantly splitting huge muta groups per hand to negate their splash is the reason god put me on the planet, so if I can catch them on unpassable terrain (So there is no Ground AA) I do ok. Really early liberators on certain maps over mineral lines though...that range has to go.
On August 29 2015 17:39 HaRuHi wrote: Appearantly splitting huge muta groups per hand to negate their splash is the reason god put me on the planet, so if I can catch them on unpassable terrain (So there is no Ground AA) I do ok. Really early liberators on certain maps over mineral lines though...that range has to go.
you can magic box them just like a thor
On August 29 2015 18:43 KT_Elwood wrote: Liberator will go the way of the warhound anyway.
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
there are some maps where spores do not help you at all, this isn't theory crafting.
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
there are some maps where spores do not help you at all, this isn't theory crafting.
exactly. he's the one theorycrafting here. there was a guy who tested the positioning a few pages ago that validated that spores alone aren't enough
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
Yeah brigehead and dash terminal says hi. And this is how i know you dont even play the game.
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
Yeah brigehead and dash terminal says hi. And this is how i know you dont even play the game.
currently #1 masters with a 80% winrate. Granted I haven't played in like two years but I was rank 1 GM for a while when I did.
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
Yeah brigehead and dash terminal says hi. And this is how i know you dont even play the game.
currently #1 masters with a 80% winrate. Granted I haven't played in like two years but I was rank 1 GM for a while when I did.
I love getting "told" by golds. just stop.
there's actually no way you're masters and think that spores are the solution to hellbat + lib pushes
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
Yeah brigehead and dash terminal says hi. And this is how i know you dont even play the game.
currently #1 masters with a 80% winrate. Granted I haven't played in like two years but I was rank 1 GM for a while when I did.
I love getting "told" by golds. just stop.
If you are what you say, how can you not know about those maps being abused like hell ? Also dont tell me its map design issue, when the only problem is the Liberator.
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
Yeah brigehead and dash terminal says hi. And this is how i know you dont even play the game.
currently #1 masters with a 80% winrate. Granted I haven't played in like two years but I was rank 1 GM for a while when I did.
I love getting "told" by golds. just stop.
If you are what you say, how can you not know about those maps being abused like hell ? Also dont tell me its map design issue, whn the only problem is the Liberator.
Alot of maps have death spaces.
He's #1 GM, we are wrong and clueless what we are talking about because we are 'golds"
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
Yeah brigehead and dash terminal says hi. And this is how i know you dont even play the game.
currently #1 masters with a 80% winrate. Granted I haven't played in like two years but I was rank 1 GM for a while when I did.
I love getting "told" by golds. just stop.
Actually, before you tell anyone off I'd like to see some proof of your claims. Bullshitting doesn't really fly in this forum.
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
Yeah brigehead and dash terminal says hi. And this is how i know you dont even play the game.
currently #1 masters with a 80% winrate. Granted I haven't played in like two years but I was rank 1 GM for a while when I did.
I love getting "told" by golds. just stop.
Actually, before you tell anyone off I'd like to see some proof of your claims. Bullshitting doesn't really fly in this forum.
do you really need to ask for proof when an 8 post TL account walks into a balance thread and claims he was #1 gm? lol
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
Yeah brigehead and dash terminal says hi. And this is how i know you dont even play the game.
currently #1 masters with a 80% winrate. Granted I haven't played in like two years but I was rank 1 GM for a while when I did.
I love getting "told" by golds. just stop.
Actually, before you tell anyone off I'd like to see some proof of your claims. Bullshitting doesn't really fly in this forum.
do you really need to ask for proof when an 8 post TL account walks into a balance thread and claims he was #1 gm? lol
The amount of 10,20, 50, an so on, post accounts that apperead since the macro changes is amazing, its getting quite bad, even reddit is better now :|
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
Yeah brigehead and dash terminal says hi. And this is how i know you dont even play the game.
currently #1 masters with a 80% winrate. Granted I haven't played in like two years but I was rank 1 GM for a while when I did.
I love getting "told" by golds. just stop.
Actually, before you tell anyone off I'd like to see some proof of your claims. Bullshitting doesn't really fly in this forum.
do you really need to ask for proof when an 8 post TL account walks into a balance thread and claims he was #1 gm? lol
I'm guessing that's LRM)kenzy. Was active in brood war but not sure how much he competed in sc2.
What's the reason why zergs aren't going fast 4 gas? Every zerg I've played is still trying to get a 3rd base on hatchery tech and I don't think that's okay against liberator/hellbat. Delaying with spore/spine works very well against liberators but when you go 3 hatch before lair, your tech just doesn't seem to come out in time.
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
Yeah brigehead and dash terminal says hi. And this is how i know you dont even play the game.
currently #1 masters with a 80% winrate. Granted I haven't played in like two years but I was rank 1 GM for a while when I did.
I love getting "told" by golds. just stop.
lol Kenzy you are so full of it man, you aren't #1 masters with 80% win rate ( Even if you are in LOTV, this means nothing) , and you sure as hell were never #1 GM ( In HOTS or LOTV)
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
Yeah brigehead and dash terminal says hi. And this is how i know you dont even play the game.
currently #1 masters with a 80% winrate. Granted I haven't played in like two years but I was rank 1 GM for a while when I did.
I love getting "told" by golds. just stop.
Actually, before you tell anyone off I'd like to see some proof of your claims. Bullshitting doesn't really fly in this forum.
do you really need to ask for proof when an 8 post TL account walks into a balance thread and claims he was #1 gm? lol
I'm guessing that's LRM)kenzy. Was active in brood war but not sure how much he competed in sc2.
What's the reason why zergs aren't going fast 4 gas? Every zerg I've played is still trying to get a 3rd base on hatchery tech and I don't think that's okay against liberator/hellbat. Delaying with spore/spine works very well against liberators but when you go 3 hatch before lair, your tech just doesn't seem to come out in time.
even if you go for a 3 minute lair muta build (which is fastest optimal lair with gas-pool speedling build), the liberator hellbat push comes much earlier and denies you from mining at both bases, leaving you mineral dry for a long period while terran can afford to get a 3rd base behind it. The problem with only having 2 bases is that you won't have a decent drone count if you intend to hold the next terran push after liberator opening unless he goes mech.
that said I'm trying to figure out how 2 base lair roach openings work to prevent him from pushing me with liberator - as he will have to defend his own base, but this build has a weakness to a well microd tank drop. It feels rather coinflippy at the moment, I feel like liberators should require fusion core tech because they are simply too strong early on. I'm playing vs the top gm lotv terrans most of the time so that would be the source of this opinion
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
Yeah brigehead and dash terminal says hi. And this is how i know you dont even play the game.
currently #1 masters with a 80% winrate. Granted I haven't played in like two years but I was rank 1 GM for a while when I did.
I love getting "told" by golds. just stop.
Actually, before you tell anyone off I'd like to see some proof of your claims. Bullshitting doesn't really fly in this forum.
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
Yeah brigehead and dash terminal says hi. And this is how i know you dont even play the game.
currently #1 masters with a 80% winrate. Granted I haven't played in like two years but I was rank 1 GM for a while when I did.
I love getting "told" by golds. just stop.
lol Kenzy you are so full of it man, you aren't #1 masters with 80% win rate ( Even if you are in LOTV, this means nothing) , and you sure as hell were never #1 GM ( In HOTS or LOTV)
Please stop.
Or go prove it in a 1v1, whichever.
I definitely was back in the day. Seriously man? Fuck outta here with your baseless assumptions. Granted it was with abusing infestor/BL but still.
You guys are so insane with your bullshit claims saying spores don't work vs the lib/hellbat push. Any terran here can add me and try it against me. I'd love to see it.
EDIT: One more thing, I brought up my rank only to validate my claim. Like I said if you guys don't believe me it's fine; I have the time to play vs any Terran here who thinks spores won't work.
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
Yeah brigehead and dash terminal says hi. And this is how i know you dont even play the game.
currently #1 masters with a 80% winrate. Granted I haven't played in like two years but I was rank 1 GM for a while when I did.
I love getting "told" by golds. just stop.
Actually, before you tell anyone off I'd like to see some proof of your claims. Bullshitting doesn't really fly in this forum.
do you really need to ask for proof when an 8 post TL account walks into a balance thread and claims he was #1 gm? lol
I'm guessing that's LRM)kenzy. Was active in brood war but not sure how much he competed in sc2.
What's the reason why zergs aren't going fast 4 gas? Every zerg I've played is still trying to get a 3rd base on hatchery tech and I don't think that's okay against liberator/hellbat. Delaying with spore/spine works very well against liberators but when you go 3 hatch before lair, your tech just doesn't seem to come out in time.
even if you go for a 3 minute lair muta build (which is fastest optimal lair with gas-pool speedling build), the liberator hellbat push comes much earlier and denies you from mining at both bases, leaving you mineral dry for a long period while terran can afford to get a 3rd base behind it. The problem with only having 2 bases is that you won't have a decent drone count if you intend to hold the next terran push after liberator opening unless he goes mech.
that said I'm trying to figure out how 2 base lair roach openings work to prevent him from pushing me with liberator - as he will have to defend his own base, but this build has a weakness to a well microd tank drop. It feels rather coinflippy at the moment, I feel like liberators should require fusion core tech because they are simply too strong early on. I'm playing vs the top gm lotv terrans most of the time so that would be the source of this opinion
Its all about that first scout around I think it's 3 min..gotta double check that timing.
I can't even tell you the last time Ive been on the receiving end of tank drop harass tho bc all I play is zvz and zvp these days when I 1v1
The problem is that it forces air, Just like early Cyclones you need phoenix to pick them up and shoot them with blink stalkers, now you need stargate against Liberators,
Same for Zerg, you really need Spire.
Its such BS, The buff they got needs to reversed, they where good before to but not this early in the game.
You never see Banshee at all cuz there is no god damn point
I'm currently gm zerg (lotv) and altough I agree that the liberator is very strong I don't think blizzard should nerf it just yet. Every time I've lost against liberator hellbat push I feel as if I could have done better, making spores earlier or positioned them better. Maybe they can be abused on a particular map which makes them impossible to deal with and if that's the case maybe the map should be adressed instead as I'm sure someone has already suggested.
A unit such as the lurker or liberator should be strong if positioned correctly on the battlefield. This is my opinion right now and I might be wrong but all I'm saying is to give it some time.
On September 01 2015 01:46 nixi wrote: I'm currently gm zerg (lotv) and altough I agree that the liberator is very strong I don't think blizzard should nerf it just yet. Every time I've lost against liberator hellbat push I feel as if I could have done better, making spores earlier or positioned them better. Maybe they can be abused on a particular map which makes them impossible to deal with and if that's the case maybe the map should be adressed instead as I'm sure someone has already suggested.
A unit such as the lurker or liberator should be strong if positioned correctly on the battlefield. This is my opinion right now and I might be wrong but all I'm saying is to give it some time.
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
Yeah brigehead and dash terminal says hi. And this is how i know you dont even play the game.
currently #1 masters with a 80% winrate. Granted I haven't played in like two years but I was rank 1 GM for a while when I did.
I love getting "told" by golds. just stop.
lol Kenzy you are so full of it man, you aren't #1 masters with 80% win rate ( Even if you are in LOTV, this means nothing) , and you sure as hell were never #1 GM ( In HOTS or LOTV)
Please stop.
Or go prove it in a 1v1, whichever.
Fuck outta here with your baseless assumptions.
You guys are so insane with your bullshit claims
EDIT: One more thing, I brought up my rank only to validate my claim.
How can you bring up your rank to validate a claim when you have NO PROOF to VALIDATE your CLAIM? Being rank 12 Masters in LOTV means nothing, I am floating around 50~70 Grandmaster Zerg in LOTV, GM Zerg in HOTS and yea, stating that Spores will save you from Liberators that can shoot your mineral line outside of the range of the spores, is something a low level Zerg would say. Kinda like a Zerg floating around rank 12 masters in LOTV.
On August 28 2015 13:52 kenzy_5g wrote: No they're not imba. Actually to hold off the early-midgame push with liberators and hellbats, just make a spore or two. It's what I do and I'm grandmaster.
You can uproot and move em all around to defend your third, etc.
by the time you reposition and uproot, liberator will just change its position or harrass elsewhere.
This must be bait.
Obviously you reposition in order to zone them from your third/wherever the timing attack is taking place. If you only make two then that secures your third. And no, they can't reposition because if you use proper spore positioning then they can't do a damn thing; they're ZONED from your third. Maybe you should actually try it instead of theorycrafting.
Yeah brigehead and dash terminal says hi. And this is how i know you dont even play the game.
currently #1 masters with a 80% winrate. Granted I haven't played in like two years but I was rank 1 GM for a while when I did.
I love getting "told" by golds. just stop.
lol Kenzy you are so full of it man, you aren't #1 masters with 80% win rate ( Even if you are in LOTV, this means nothing) , and you sure as hell were never #1 GM ( In HOTS or LOTV)
Please stop.
Or go prove it in a 1v1, whichever.
Fuck outta here with your baseless assumptions.
You guys are so insane with your bullshit claims
EDIT: One more thing, I brought up my rank only to validate my claim.
How can you bring up your rank to validate a claim when you have NO PROOF to VALIDATE your CLAIM? Being rank 12 Masters in LOTV means nothing, I am floating around 50~70 Grandmaster Zerg in LOTV, GM Zerg in HOTS and yea, stating that Spores will save you from Liberators that can shoot your mineral line outside of the range of the spores, is something a low level Zerg would say. Kinda like a Zerg floating around rank 12 masters in LOTV.
Thats kinda rough to say. Most low level zergs would not say stuff like that
Liberators have like 15 range, they don't give any fucks about static defense or even stalkers and such
Every time I've lost against liberator hellbat push I feel as if I could have done better
Every time i lose against it (not that often TBH), i'm reminded to make more phoenix's earlier as there's not really much other response to liberator-bio. This is zerg thread, but you should consider the POV of other races too. The liberator in its current form doesn't work well IMO. It's too easy to get 6-8 of them and when you have that count, ground army of any form can be annihilated - even if their range was halved, they'd still be very powerful. The range is just the icing on the cake. They have a fairly good splash anti-air attack and great mobility through wings and movement speed, so i feel that they don't need to produce this quickly or be this dominant against ground in order to be a good unit that works.
originally i was losing to the lib/hellbat push a lot. now i feel much more confident defending it because i've had some experience against it. im truthfully not ready to say that the liberator is hella op at this point in the game. however i do think that it is incredibly easy to use and really puts a lot of pressure on their opponent to respond perfectly or just get annihilated when the libs reach critical mass. i think that's what makes the unit "op" more than anything.
that said, it would nice to see either a rate of fire decrease or a damage decrease at the cost of an HP or armor buff to the unit. id gladly have it take 1 more ravager shot if it didn't murder my stuff in like 2 hits while i try to get in range.
We seemed to handle it fine with air toss or phoenix+ground but the design itself is frustrating, probably the range is the worst thing there. It's extremely good at its anti-ground job but it also comes out early (it's a t2 unit, not t3), produces really fast (no addon or reactor) and is also really fast with a very solid air to air attack.
Another unit that i feel is strong now is the Adept - but there are clear weaknesses. It's fairly low range, only does 43% of its damage to armored targets and can't shoot up. The liberator kinda does everything
Fairly sure i've seen one earlier than that in a real master MMR game
They can actually have the anti-ground siege at about 3:30. Have you tried attacking up a walled ramp with a liberator sieged ~10 range behind it at ~3:30 - 5:00? Neither have i and i never will
IMO you need 1 spore forward and 2-3 ravagers along with some roaches prepared before the attack arrives. If needed get some scouting roaches and if you see hellbat attack prepared, pull them back and consider whether to make 2 ravager at that point. You'd be surprised how well ravager do against hellbat, too. A late lair comes with it, with earlier 3rd and quicker saturation. Biggest problem you'll face is tank drop, but that can also be dealt with. Not a huge problem IMO. Admittedly I'm not playing against the best liberator hellbat micro at this point. My biggest complaint about liberators is they make TvZ alot less fun. You can't use mutas very well, instead you have to maneuver around with clunky ravagers avoiding a circle of death which your units will randomly wander into at times. It's a nerve wracking and irritating style. Unforgiving too. I just much prefer the matchup with mutas as a core unit
On September 01 2015 03:07 EazyMoney96 wrote: - reactored - 15 range - 85 damage - only need armory for AG - can be put at 5 min in the game
What other unit can you get this fast and be this powerfull ? I tell you... NONE
Lukers needs Lair then Lurker Den, doesnt have crazy range
Siege Tanks cost alot, doesnt do the same insane ammout of damage, need Medivac to harass insanely and even that gets nerfed by 0.75 delay
Disruptors requires alot of tech and even tho it has alot of damage, the range is not insane and you wont see them at 5 min
Cmon... everyone with any sense of logic knows this units needs nerfs.
- tech lab - lower damage - lower range - AG research
you have to consider it's biggest downside - if you're getting liberators, in low numbers you can maneuver around the ground attack quite easily. so if you're getting them really quickly, anything with high mobility will be a huge hassle. big gateway or roach attacks can take advantage of this. not to mention the lack of economic followup that rushed liberators create (which is why you don't see the above comparisons rushed)
that said, i think your comparisons are mildly accurate but you also need to consider that each of them have upsides and downsides that the liberators don't have.
On September 01 2015 03:18 crazedrat wrote: IMO you need 1 spore forward and 2-3 ravagers along with some roaches prepared before the attack arrives. If needed get some scouting roaches and if you see hellbat attack prepared, pull them back and consider whether to make 2 ravager at that point. You'd be surprised how well ravager do against hellbat, too. A late lair comes with it, with earlier 3rd and quicker saturation. Biggest problem you'll face is tank drop, but that can also be dealt with. Not a huge problem IMO. Admittedly I'm not playing against the best liberator hellbat micro at this point. My biggest complaint about liberators is they make TvZ alot less fun. You can't use mutas very well, instead you have to maneuver around with clunky ravagers avoiding a circle of death which your units will randomly wander into at times. It's a nerve wracking and irritating style. Unforgiving too. I just much prefer the matchup with mutas as a core unit
if you can get out anywhere from 4-6 ravagers you're pretty set because they also do well vs the hellbats with their increased range and flame attack. spores are nice if you can get them up, but you have to really position them well otherwise the hellbats can just eat em up. i usually get 1 or 2 on top of my production/queens so that i can't get camped along with 1 spine where the attack is coming from.
alternatively, some zerg players are trying 2 base lair/muta builds to deal with them. if the terran has a 2nd base, he won't have enough money to sit under turrets with the libs, which can be out-micro'd in small numbers (like when this timing hits).
admittedly mass muta is irritating to deal with as a mech player because thors sorta suck in low numbers, are expensive, and clunky. widow mines do alright, but any good zerg player carries an overseer. investing too much money in turrets lowers the number of hellions you can produce too, so i truthfully do think that terran needed a bit of assistance in the mobility department.
Fairly sure i've seen one earlier than that in a real master MMR game
They can actually have the anti-ground siege at about 3:30. Have you tried attacking up a walled ramp with a liberator sieged ~10 range behind it at ~3:30 - 5:00? Neither have i and i never will
No i dont play Terran, mainly Zerg and offrace as Protoss. And even tho i see people complain about Adepts, Liberators are 10x times dumber then Adepts.
80% of the ZvTs i face Liberator Hellbat push (this alone should be a reason to nerf it). No choice but blindly rush spire. Still, by the time spire is done, terran is already sieged in your face.
On September 01 2015 03:07 EazyMoney96 wrote: - reactored - 15 range - 85 damage - only need armory for AG - can be put at 5 min in the game
What other unit can you get this fast and be this powerfull ? I tell you... NONE
Lukers needs Lair then Lurker Den, doesnt have crazy range
Siege Tanks cost alot, doesnt do the same insane ammout of damage, need Medivac to harass insanely and even that gets nerfed by 0.75 delay
Disruptors requires alot of tech and even tho it has alot of damage, the range is not insane and you wont see them at 5 min
Cmon... everyone with any sense of logic knows this units needs nerfs.
- tech lab - lower damage - lower range - AG research
you have to consider it's biggest downside - if you're getting liberators, in low numbers you can maneuver around the ground attack quite easily. so if you're getting them really quickly, anything with high mobility will be a huge hassle. big gateway or roach attacks can take advantage of this. not to mention the lack of economic followup that rushed liberators create (which is why you don't see the above comparisons rushed)
that said, i think your comparisons are mildly accurate but you also need to consider that each of them have upsides and downsides that the liberators don't have.
On September 01 2015 03:18 crazedrat wrote: IMO you need 1 spore forward and 2-3 ravagers along with some roaches prepared before the attack arrives. If needed get some scouting roaches and if you see hellbat attack prepared, pull them back and consider whether to make 2 ravager at that point. You'd be surprised how well ravager do against hellbat, too. A late lair comes with it, with earlier 3rd and quicker saturation. Biggest problem you'll face is tank drop, but that can also be dealt with. Not a huge problem IMO. Admittedly I'm not playing against the best liberator hellbat micro at this point. My biggest complaint about liberators is they make TvZ alot less fun. You can't use mutas very well, instead you have to maneuver around with clunky ravagers avoiding a circle of death which your units will randomly wander into at times. It's a nerve wracking and irritating style. Unforgiving too. I just much prefer the matchup with mutas as a core unit
if you can get out anywhere from 4-6 ravagers you're pretty set because they also do well vs the hellbats with their increased range and flame attack. spores are nice if you can get them up, but you have to really position them well otherwise the hellbats can just eat em up. i usually get 1 or 2 on top of my production/queens so that i can't get camped along with 1 spine where the attack is coming from.
alternatively, some zerg players are trying 2 base lair/muta builds to deal with them. if the terran has a 2nd base, he won't have enough money to sit under turrets with the libs, which can be out-micro'd in small numbers (like when this timing hits).
admittedly mass muta is irritating to deal with as a mech player because thors sorta suck in low numbers, are expensive, and clunky. widow mines do alright, but any good zerg player carries an overseer. investing too much money in turrets lowers the number of hellions you can produce too, so i truthfully do think that terran needed a bit of assistance in the mobility department.
Very reasonable post, imo.
I guarantee the Liberator will be nerfed. Terran's can't have nice things! You all know that : ) Incoming nerf will be something like, "randomly shoots friendly units and a global warning--and map ping--will fire each time one is built".
On September 01 2015 04:23 EazyMoney96 wrote: When MULE will be put in the game, economy wont be a problem to rush 2 Liberators and put them into death spaces to deny mining.
We saw this from QxC and beatyqt vs protoss, Zerg rushed Spire every game becuase of that.
Really i dont see any god damn disadvantage to get 2 liberators in the early game.
Fairly sure i've seen one earlier than that in a real master MMR game
They can actually have the anti-ground siege at about 3:30. Have you tried attacking up a walled ramp with a liberator sieged ~10 range behind it at ~3:30 - 5:00? Neither have i and i never will
No i dont play Terran, mainly Zerg and offrace as Protoss. And even tho i see people complain about Adepts, Liberators are 10x times dumber then Adepts.
On September 01 2015 04:23 EazyMoney96 wrote: When MULE will be put in the game, economy wont be a problem to rush 2 Liberators and put them into death spaces to deny mining.
We saw this from QxC and beatyqt vs protoss, Zerg rushed Spire every game becuase of that.
Really i dont see any god damn disadvantage to get 2 liberators in the early game.
Fairly sure i've seen one earlier than that in a real master MMR game
They can actually have the anti-ground siege at about 3:30. Have you tried attacking up a walled ramp with a liberator sieged ~10 range behind it at ~3:30 - 5:00? Neither have i and i never will
No i dont play Terran, mainly Zerg and offrace as Protoss. And even tho i see people complain about Adepts, Liberators are 10x times dumber then Adepts.
do us a favor and go play some terran, rush 2 liberators vs a zerg player, and see what happens to you
On September 01 2015 04:23 EazyMoney96 wrote: When MULE will be put in the game, economy wont be a problem to rush 2 Liberators and put them into death spaces to deny mining.
We saw this from QxC and beatyqt vs protoss, Zerg rushed Spire every game becuase of that.
Really i dont see any god damn disadvantage to get 2 liberators in the early game.
On September 01 2015 03:14 Cyro wrote:
- can be put at 5 min in the game
Fairly sure i've seen one earlier than that in a real master MMR game
They can actually have the anti-ground siege at about 3:30. Have you tried attacking up a walled ramp with a liberator sieged ~10 range behind it at ~3:30 - 5:00? Neither have i and i never will
No i dont play Terran, mainly Zerg and offrace as Protoss. And even tho i see people complain about Adepts, Liberators are 10x times dumber then Adepts.
On September 01 2015 04:23 EazyMoney96 wrote: When MULE will be put in the game, economy wont be a problem to rush 2 Liberators and put them into death spaces to deny mining.
We saw this from QxC and beatyqt vs protoss, Zerg rushed Spire every game becuase of that.
Really i dont see any god damn disadvantage to get 2 liberators in the early game.
On September 01 2015 03:14 Cyro wrote:
- can be put at 5 min in the game
Fairly sure i've seen one earlier than that in a real master MMR game
They can actually have the anti-ground siege at about 3:30. Have you tried attacking up a walled ramp with a liberator sieged ~10 range behind it at ~3:30 - 5:00? Neither have i and i never will
No i dont play Terran, mainly Zerg and offrace as Protoss. And even tho i see people complain about Adepts, Liberators are 10x times dumber then Adepts.
More on topic, I've always wondered why the liberator anti-ground ability grants vision. Making it be able to only shoot what it can see would be a pretty good way of nerfing early mineral line abuse, as well making spotters more important (vision, in general, isn't important enough in this game, IMO).
lmao that ban comment actually is priceless..ive never seen something like that before lol. i see him in popular streamers.
in other news, i got the opportunity to hold a liberator hellbat push into a liberator, hellbat, bio tank attack on my third. it felt SOOOOOO good to hold it and win the game. he was even microing the tanks back and shit i was a little scared i wouldn't hold.
but here's one big thing to note about these crazy liberator pushes
his natural expansion was SOOOOO late. like beyond late if he wanted to stay in the game beyond it. you can't afford to pump liberators hellbats, and get all of your tech out at the same time. so if you have the proper response by having roaches ready to be morphed into ravagers, you'll be ok on 2 base eco + a macro hatch until you can get up to lair, 3 bases, and clear out the libs.
Shouldn't a tech timing push of Hellbat/Liberator curbstomp a fast 3 Hatch build? There has to be some risk to greed. It is not like Hellbat/Liberator is unscoutable (reactor starport, reactor factory, armory).
On September 01 2015 09:17 CannonsNCarriers wrote: Shouldn't a tech timing push of Hellbat/Liberator curbstomp a fast 3 Hatch build? There has to be some risk to greed. It is not like Hellbat/Liberator is unscoutable (reactor starport, reactor factory, armory).
Except it works vs non greedy builds to, sometimes even allowing the terran to go 3CC behind this push. This was the way before macro nerf and automatic macro is coming next patch.
Terran will be IMBA again, even nathanias admited that before the patch witch macro, terran was IMBA
Look at how many Terrans where in redbull tournament finalls !!
Then remember that even tho 1 P and Z qualifed for Washinton 2 days ago beating 4 Terran teams. THERE are another 2 Terran teams there qualifed for Washinton that won the first qualifer, before the IMBA Liberator.
So 6T and 1Z, 3P with 3 TvT finalls in a row since the Liberator buff.
On September 01 2015 02:47 BluemoonSC wrote: originally i was losing to the lib/hellbat push a lot. now i feel much more confident defending it because i've had some experience against it. im truthfully not ready to say that the liberator is hella op at this point in the game. however i do think that it is incredibly easy to use and really puts a lot of pressure on their opponent to respond perfectly or just get annihilated when the libs reach critical mass. i think that's what makes the unit "op" more than anything.
that said, it would nice to see either a rate of fire decrease or a damage decrease at the cost of an HP or armor buff to the unit. id gladly have it take 1 more ravager shot if it didn't murder my stuff in like 2 hits while i try to get in range.
This is how I feel about the unit, there is responses to it, but it really forces you to almost blind prepare for it and react very well or your drone lines + Queens are just toast.
If anything they should rebalance it so it's not so crazy good against ground, but that it CAN support ground in it's siege mode but I feel the primary role for the Liberator should be to better defend mech against Mutalisk play.
Make it require a tech lab Reduce damage/Reduce radius of ground mode Buff as necessary but probably not needed
I think Liberator is fairly easy to hold off and it didn't take me too long to get used to dealing with lib/hellbat pushes. Yes, you probably wanna open with a few queens and lingspeed into RW/2gas ravager every game a starport is involved, but that just seems like proper play to me.
Two Liberators setting up a double field where you cannot approach either without losing like 2-3 Ravagers is very annoying and questionable, though. Part of me wants damage split over faster, but less impactful shots so that my brain at least can process where the things are firing so I can transfuse and get money HP on my ravagers and be rewarded for transfuse skills. Like, have them actually escape. Counts for queens taking them down, also. A transfused queen will only take 2 more shots before it's gone. It just happens a tad too fast, but cost for cost idk what's justifiable. It just would be cool if Transfuse was stronger vs Liberators in early game
But in the end, I guess it goes like this: make Ravagers early and get them in position early before Libs set up a double field or pay for it by taking a less than perfect trade. With 3 ravagers, you can 1-shot a liberator setting up, so I guess it's somewhat fair that you can bait them in easy and punish T hard for it.
On September 01 2015 10:19 Liquid`Snute wrote: I think Liberator is fairly easy to hold off and it didn't take me too long to get used to dealing with lib/hellbat pushes. Yes, you probably wanna open with a few queens and lingspeed into RW/2gas ravager every game a starport is involved, but that just seems like proper play to me.
Two Liberators setting up a double field where you cannot approach either without losing like 2-3 Ravagers is very annoying and questionable, though. Part of me wants damage split over faster, but less impactful shots so that my brain at least can process where the things are firing so I can transfuse and get money HP on my ravagers and be rewarded for transfuse skills. Like, have them actually escape. Counts for queens taking them down, also. A transfused queen will only take 2 more shots before it's gone. It just happens a tad too fast, but cost for cost idk what's justifiable. It just would be cool if Transfuse was stronger vs Liberators in early game
But in the end, I guess it goes like this: make Ravagers early and get them in position early before Libs set up a double field or pay for it by taking a less than perfect trade. With 3 ravagers, you can 1-shot a liberator setting up, so I guess it's somewhat fair that you can bait them in easy and punish T hard for it.
I love you and your amazing unbiased insight posts sir, totally agree.
On September 01 2015 10:19 Liquid`Snute wrote: I think Liberator is fairly easy to hold off and it didn't take me too long to get used to dealing with lib/hellbat pushes. Yes, you probably wanna open with a few queens and lingspeed into RW/2gas ravager every game a starport is involved, but that just seems like proper play to me.
Two Liberators setting up a double field where you cannot approach either without losing like 2-3 Ravagers is very annoying and questionable, though. Part of me wants damage split over faster, but less impactful shots so that my brain at least can process where the things are firing so I can transfuse and get money HP on my ravagers and be rewarded for transfuse skills. Like, have them actually escape. Counts for queens taking them down, also. A transfused queen will only take 2 more shots before it's gone. It just happens a tad too fast, but cost for cost idk what's justifiable. It just would be cool if Transfuse was stronger vs Liberators in early game
But in the end, I guess it goes like this: make Ravagers early and get them in position early before Libs set up a double field or pay for it by taking a less than perfect trade. With 3 ravagers, you can 1-shot a liberator setting up, so I guess it's somewhat fair that you can bait them in easy and punish T hard for it.
Liberator is the most broken unit in the game atm.15 range flying tank that come out too early and kill hydra in 1 hit and can only be countred by corupters and mass viper for zerg but most people agree that liberator is too op atm and i am sure it will be nerfed to something like 50 damage and 10 ranage and will need upgrade to make it 13 range so dont worry terran will get their nerf one day and untill than,yea accept the fact that terran will win you. Anyway the current version of the beta is the most unbalanced since they released the beta so just wait for the final game
On September 01 2015 10:19 Liquid`Snute wrote: I think Liberator is fairly easy to hold off and it didn't take me too long to get used to dealing with lib/hellbat pushes. Yes, you probably wanna open with a few queens and lingspeed into RW/2gas ravager every game a starport is involved, but that just seems like proper play to me.
Two Liberators setting up a double field where you cannot approach either without losing like 2-3 Ravagers is very annoying and questionable, though. Part of me wants damage split over faster, but less impactful shots so that my brain at least can process where the things are firing so I can transfuse and get money HP on my ravagers and be rewarded for transfuse skills. Like, have them actually escape. Counts for queens taking them down, also. A transfused queen will only take 2 more shots before it's gone. It just happens a tad too fast, but cost for cost idk what's justifiable. It just would be cool if Transfuse was stronger vs Liberators in early game
But in the end, I guess it goes like this: make Ravagers early and get them in position early before Libs set up a double field or pay for it by taking a less than perfect trade. With 3 ravagers, you can 1-shot a liberator setting up, so I guess it's somewhat fair that you can bait them in easy and punish T hard for it.
Thanks for your insight, I hope Teamliquid will try to discuss with professional player as they did for HoTS patch, I am really curious to know what they (and thus, you too) think about the macro changes, economy model and so on.
yeah, pretty much what snute said. Some of the spots you can put liberators in are very hard to deal with and you are pretty limited in your reaction the moment you see a starport. Otherwise it is not that hard to deal with them.
For me from a design perspective the biggest problem with liberator is that they can stay outside the range of all units including spores and still harass mineral lines as long as there's enough dead space behind the base. That is a huge problem because it will dictate the development of maps in the future. Any unit that single handedly forces maps to be different needs to be changed. Imo even if that meant the area needed to be bigger I think the liberator should just stay in the middle of the circle. It would fit the visual style of the unit, while being a very damaging unit that flies and control space.
As it stands the unit has the clear problem of being able to position in places where it's out of range of any solution except for air,and has everyone knows any unit that forces the opposing player to go a certain route isn't good for the game since it creates repetitive games that no one likes.
On September 01 2015 18:51 Bazik wrote: Just gonna leave this here.
For me from a design perspective the biggest problem with liberator is that they can stay outside the range of all units including spores and still harass mineral lines as long as there's enough dead space behind the base. That is a huge problem because it will dictate the development of maps in the future. Any unit that single handedly forces maps to be different needs to be changed. Imo even if that meant the area needed to be bigger I think the liberator should just stay in the middle of the circle. It would fit the visual style of the unit, while being a very damaging unit that flies and control space.
As it stands the unit has the clear problem of being able to position in places where it's out of range of any solution except for air,and has everyone knows any unit that forces the opposing player to go a certain route isn't good for the game since it creates repetitive games that no one likes.
Bazik
This is the real problem + combined with them being so early in the game.
On September 01 2015 18:51 Bazik wrote: Just gonna leave this here.
For me from a design perspective the biggest problem with liberator is that they can stay outside the range of all units including spores and still harass mineral lines as long as there's enough dead space behind the base. That is a huge problem because it will dictate the development of maps in the future. Any unit that single handedly forces maps to be different needs to be changed. Imo even if that meant the area needed to be bigger I think the liberator should just stay in the middle of the circle. It would fit the visual style of the unit, while being a very damaging unit that flies and control space.
As it stands the unit has the clear problem of being able to position in places where it's out of range of any solution except for air,and has everyone knows any unit that forces the opposing player to go a certain route isn't good for the game since it creates repetitive games that no one likes.
Bazik
if a liberator is in the dead space behind your base and you're not mining for a long time, you're doing something wrong. terran has to make a gigantic investment in order to get reactored liberators AND an armory in an amount of time that makes it difficult for you to mine. on most maps, there is at most one position that makes them impossible to reach with ravagers rspores. if you lose mining for a little in that spot, you need to consider how you're expanding/teching as a zerg player.
when the liberators come out, you can easily have 3 hatcheries and a roach warren as well as the gas to get ravagers if you're playing well, even if they're doing this off of one base. and when they aren't killing things with the liberators, they will eventually get antsy and make mistakes because they NEED to make the investment worth it. 2 or 3 drones is NOT enough damage if they're teching that hard off of one base and you're on 2 with a 3rd hatchery down. you don't even need to plant the spire at this stage, but i would definitely have the lair ready.
the unit itself isn't op, but like snute said (and i said a page back ), the damage or rate of fire needs to be reduced in some form, even if the dps stays the same, because its way easier for the terran to deal damage with this unit than it is to defend. and more than anything i think that's why the unit feels imbalanced even though its actually not too bad and necessary for the terran army.
This is a list of spots that the liberator can stop mining to some capacity without a spore or a queen being able to attack them, the images use a turret to display the 7 range the black line is where the turret reaches to all of the images show untouchable places from 7 range GTA attacks (Queen and Spores) bear in mind stalkers have 6 range so I'm sure these spots are also effective there.
Terraform Main base isn't affected, nor is the natural below is a image of the central more exposed third Here is the other potential third Here is the range from the natural
Bridgehead You can only attack the third mineral line without being affected placing the ATG when there's a double layer is very imprecise since it jumps forward which is why I place the liberator to the side
Orbital Shipyard This is in that pocket natural
Dash and Terminal This is the natural The third behind your natural The forward third, it's not the one that's directly left from the natural the one that is infront of that one. Excuse the lack of the black line I couldn't see the missile turret range on the image but I tested it before I took the photo ingame by building a turret there and seeing if it could attack the liberator
Ruins of Seras This is your natural This is the further away third not the one tucked just forward from the natural/mainbase.
Moonlight Madness This map truly is madness liberators are insanely broken on this map, here's your pocket natural/third The other natural that most people take first The potential third that is in a perfect line with your main and the above natural
Lerilak Crest The only map with 0 mineral line harass points this is mainly due to the large amount of space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger
Conclusion The only way to effectively deal with the early liberators requires you to specifically counter them and even then it's impossible to hard counter the build since getting a spire out at a fast enough time puts you behind in economy as already discussed in this thread, this leaves you with a Ravager opener, unmorphing a liberator takes 1 second and the bile take 2.5 seconds to land meaning someone who is on top of their control can avoid any damage and re-position in a fast enough time to take more shots. It requires 3 corrosive bile to destroy a liberator. It takes roughly 1min and 8 seconds for you to prepare ravagers, and taking my timings from the QXC archon game the first liberator can arrive at 4:50, which means you need to be making a roach warren at 3:42 at the latest, the first time you can confirm the build with 100% certainty is at 3:40 when the armory is placed and when you see no techlab on the starport. Because if you assume it's a liberator off two gas and go for ravagers a hellbat banshee push will probably end up doing crippling damage. The timing window to react is so small that you have to be preparing before this build arrives. Sure you can stop this push, but you will be behind in economy in any method that is effective. A ravager build still isn't effective because for a lot of these spots for them to be in range of the liberator. So the only two builds that have the range for you to counter these spots are ineffective because they put you behind in economy. These spots aren't even essential since you can also siege up in open area for effective damage.
The best conclusion is to remove the liberator for a Valkyrie equivalent and to buff the siege tank for better zone control. Otherwise the fix will be to make everymap having a much larger space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger and constrains the map makers further.
Read the bit about the scouting timings for a 1 base liberator build and the response time for the zerg.
I don't think liberators are particularly broken. The early mineral harass will have to be changed asap, but it's only a minor thing. We might call it even a bug really.
The thing that concerns me is how much they counter mutas. Muta/ling/bling vs bio was the best matchup in HotS. It would be sad if liberators countered mutas so hard this would not be possible. I'm not saying it's a problem now, I don't know. But it should be kept in mind. Otherwise we might get only big mutas switches as in HotS PvZ thanks to phoenix hardcounter.
Ovid there is no point in posting those pictures, people will deny this until Liberators will get nerfed.
I played as Protoss and its even more annoying, you have to get phoenix very fast.
On September 01 2015 22:11 Tuczniak wrote: I don't think liberators are particularly broken. The early mineral harass will have to be changed asap, but it's only a minor thing. We might call it even a bug really.
The thing that concerns me is how much they counter mutas. Muta/ling/bling vs bio was the best matchup in HotS. It would be sad if liberators countered mutas so hard this would not be possible. I'm not saying it's a problem now, I don't know. But it should be kept in mind. Otherwise we might get only big mutas switches as in HotS PvZ thanks to phoenix hardcounter.
You can still use muta as long as their less then 6 after that is better to go for darks style, curropter/ling/bane Even more so now since you can use Curropter harass on their PF or production.
This is a list of spots that the liberator can stop mining to some capacity without a spore or a queen being able to attack them, the images use a turret to display the 7 range the black line is where the turret reaches to all of the images show untouchable places from 7 range GTA attacks (Queen and Spores) bear in mind stalkers have 6 range so I'm sure these spots are also effective there.
Terraform Main base isn't affected, nor is the natural below is a image of the central more exposed third Here is the other potential third Here is the range from the natural
Bridgehead You can only attack the third mineral line without being affected placing the ATG when there's a double layer is very imprecise since it jumps forward which is why I place the liberator to the side
Orbital Shipyard This is in that pocket natural
Dash and Terminal This is the natural The third behind your natural The forward third, it's not the one that's directly left from the natural the one that is infront of that one. Excuse the lack of the black line I couldn't see the missile turret range on the image but I tested it before I took the photo ingame by building a turret there and seeing if it could attack the liberator
Ruins of Seras This is your natural This is the further away third not the one tucked just forward from the natural/mainbase.
Moonlight Madness This map truly is madness liberators are insanely broken on this map, here's your pocket natural/third The other natural that most people take first The potential third that is in a perfect line with your main and the above natural
Lerilak Crest The only map with 0 mineral line harass points this is mainly due to the large amount of space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger
Conclusion The only way to effectively deal with the early liberators requires you to specifically counter them and even then it's impossible to hard counter the build since getting a spire out at a fast enough time puts you behind in economy as already discussed in this thread, this leaves you with a Ravager opener, unmorphing a liberator takes 1 second and the bile take 2.5 seconds to land meaning someone who is on top of their control can avoid any damage and re-position in a fast enough time to take more shots. It requires 3 corrosive bile to destroy a liberator. It takes roughly 1min and 8 seconds for you to prepare ravagers, and taking my timings from the QXC archon game the first liberator can arrive at 4:50, which means you need to be making a roach warren at 3:42 at the latest, the first time you can confirm the build with 100% certainty is at 3:40 when the armory is placed and when you see no techlab on the starport. Because if you assume it's a liberator off two gas and go for ravagers a hellbat banshee push will probably end up doing crippling damage. The timing window to react is so small that you have to be preparing before this build arrives. Sure you can stop this push, but you will be behind in economy in any method that is effective. A ravager build still isn't effective because for a lot of these spots for them to be in range of the liberator. So the only two builds that have the range for you to counter these spots are ineffective because they put you behind in economy. These spots aren't even essential since you can also siege up in open area for effective damage.
The best conclusion is to remove the liberator for a Valkyrie equivalent and to buff the siege tank for better zone control. Otherwise the fix will be to make everymap having a much larger space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger and constrains the map makers further.
Read the bit about the scouting timings for a 1 base liberator build and the response time for the zerg.
corrosive bile has 9 range, so in most (if not all) of these pictures, ravagers can reach them. its not completely unreasonable to open up with speedlings, get your roach warren, and build 3 roaches until you can confirm that liberators are incoming. ravagers take less than 10 seconds to morph. if they're doing this build, they will be getting double gas, which is a pretty big tell that you're either getting lib'd or medivac tank dropped. if they swap the factory onto a reactor and produce hellions, you'll know you're getting lib'd.
you don't have to directly scout the reactored starport to know whats coming your way if you don't see an expansion
On September 01 2015 18:51 Bazik wrote: Just gonna leave this here.
For me from a design perspective the biggest problem with liberator is that they can stay outside the range of all units including spores and still harass mineral lines as long as there's enough dead space behind the base. That is a huge problem because it will dictate the development of maps in the future. Any unit that single handedly forces maps to be different needs to be changed. Imo even if that meant the area needed to be bigger I think the liberator should just stay in the middle of the circle. It would fit the visual style of the unit, while being a very damaging unit that flies and control space.
As it stands the unit has the clear problem of being able to position in places where it's out of range of any solution except for air,and has everyone knows any unit that forces the opposing player to go a certain route isn't good for the game since it creates repetitive games that no one likes.
Bazik
if a liberator is in the dead space behind your base and you're not mining for a long time, you're doing something wrong. terran has to make a gigantic investment in order to get reactored liberators AND an armory in an amount of time that makes it difficult for you to mine. on most maps, there is at most one position that makes them impossible to reach with ravagers rspores. if you lose mining for a little in that spot, you need to consider how you're expanding/teching as a zerg player.
when the liberators come out, you can easily have 3 hatcheries and a roach warren as well as the gas to get ravagers if you're playing well, even if they're doing this off of one base. and when they aren't killing things with the liberators, they will eventually get antsy and make mistakes because they NEED to make the investment worth it. 2 or 3 drones is NOT enough damage if they're teching that hard off of one base and you're on 2 with a 3rd hatchery down. you don't even need to plant the spire at this stage, but i would definitely have the lair ready.
the unit itself isn't op, but like snute said (and i said a page back ), the damage or rate of fire needs to be reduced in some form, even if the dps stays the same, because its way easier for the terran to deal damage with this unit than it is to defend. and more than anything i think that's why the unit feels imbalanced even though its actually not too bad and necessary for the terran army.
Ok, this may be the case right now, but on the last patch the terran could do a regular rax expand with reactored hellions and 5min liberator(s). In that case it is two base vs two base and you are on hatch tech, so 2mins away from a spire to unlock the hatchery. I.e. in a balance when Terran isn't completely suffocating - which is sadly the state of the current patch - I could see this becoming a problem. I mean eventually the balance will be razor thin like in HotS. I find it peculiar to have a ranged flying unit in the game that can theoretically and practically appear before a race can theoretically and practically have an anti-air unit that can retaliate against it.
This is a list of spots that the liberator can stop mining to some capacity without a spore or a queen being able to attack them, the images use a turret to display the 7 range the black line is where the turret reaches to all of the images show untouchable places from 7 range GTA attacks (Queen and Spores) bear in mind stalkers have 6 range so I'm sure these spots are also effective there.
Terraform Main base isn't affected, nor is the natural below is a image of the central more exposed third Here is the other potential third Here is the range from the natural
Bridgehead You can only attack the third mineral line without being affected placing the ATG when there's a double layer is very imprecise since it jumps forward which is why I place the liberator to the side
Orbital Shipyard This is in that pocket natural
Dash and Terminal This is the natural The third behind your natural The forward third, it's not the one that's directly left from the natural the one that is infront of that one. Excuse the lack of the black line I couldn't see the missile turret range on the image but I tested it before I took the photo ingame by building a turret there and seeing if it could attack the liberator
Ruins of Seras This is your natural This is the further away third not the one tucked just forward from the natural/mainbase.
Moonlight Madness This map truly is madness liberators are insanely broken on this map, here's your pocket natural/third The other natural that most people take first The potential third that is in a perfect line with your main and the above natural
Lerilak Crest The only map with 0 mineral line harass points this is mainly due to the large amount of space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger
Conclusion The only way to effectively deal with the early liberators requires you to specifically counter them and even then it's impossible to hard counter the build since getting a spire out at a fast enough time puts you behind in economy as already discussed in this thread, this leaves you with a Ravager opener, unmorphing a liberator takes 1 second and the bile take 2.5 seconds to land meaning someone who is on top of their control can avoid any damage and re-position in a fast enough time to take more shots. It requires 3 corrosive bile to destroy a liberator. It takes roughly 1min and 8 seconds for you to prepare ravagers, and taking my timings from the QXC archon game the first liberator can arrive at 4:50, which means you need to be making a roach warren at 3:42 at the latest, the first time you can confirm the build with 100% certainty is at 3:40 when the armory is placed and when you see no techlab on the starport. Because if you assume it's a liberator off two gas and go for ravagers a hellbat banshee push will probably end up doing crippling damage. The timing window to react is so small that you have to be preparing before this build arrives. Sure you can stop this push, but you will be behind in economy in any method that is effective. A ravager build still isn't effective because for a lot of these spots for them to be in range of the liberator. So the only two builds that have the range for you to counter these spots are ineffective because they put you behind in economy. These spots aren't even essential since you can also siege up in open area for effective damage.
The best conclusion is to remove the liberator for a Valkyrie equivalent and to buff the siege tank for better zone control. Otherwise the fix will be to make everymap having a much larger space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger and constrains the map makers further.
Read the bit about the scouting timings for a 1 base liberator build and the response time for the zerg.
corrosive bile has 9 range, so in most (if not all) of these pictures, ravagers can reach them. its not completely unreasonable to open up with speedlings, get your roach warren, and build 3 roaches until you can confirm that liberators are incoming. ravagers take less than 10 seconds to morph. if they're doing this build, they will be getting double gas, which is a pretty big tell that you're either getting lib'd or medivac tank dropped. if they swap the factory onto a reactor and produce hellions, you'll know you're getting lib'd.
you don't have to directly scout the reactored starport to know whats coming your way if you don't see an expansion
Yes they can reach but they will be in the circle you also only have 2 seconds of time after you scout armory/starport for you to get 3 Ravagers out which is more costly than the method of getting liberators even more so when you don't necessarily want to go down a Roach tech path. What I said isn't about a reactored starport it's about the timing of the armory, scouting 2 gas in the earlygame isn't a tell it could be banshees in which case 3 Ravagers isn't going to do jack squat. The other problem is you need more than 3 ravagers since to get to these spots the ravagers will most likely have to be in the circle and if they focus the ravagers 1 will die before you get in range. People are not using liberators to the full extent possible.
This is a list of spots that the liberator can stop mining to some capacity without a spore or a queen being able to attack them, the images use a turret to display the 7 range the black line is where the turret reaches to all of the images show untouchable places from 7 range GTA attacks (Queen and Spores) bear in mind stalkers have 6 range so I'm sure these spots are also effective there.
Terraform Main base isn't affected, nor is the natural below is a image of the central more exposed third Here is the other potential third Here is the range from the natural
Bridgehead You can only attack the third mineral line without being affected placing the ATG when there's a double layer is very imprecise since it jumps forward which is why I place the liberator to the side
Orbital Shipyard This is in that pocket natural
Dash and Terminal This is the natural The third behind your natural The forward third, it's not the one that's directly left from the natural the one that is infront of that one. Excuse the lack of the black line I couldn't see the missile turret range on the image but I tested it before I took the photo ingame by building a turret there and seeing if it could attack the liberator
Ruins of Seras This is your natural This is the further away third not the one tucked just forward from the natural/mainbase.
Moonlight Madness This map truly is madness liberators are insanely broken on this map, here's your pocket natural/third The other natural that most people take first The potential third that is in a perfect line with your main and the above natural
Lerilak Crest The only map with 0 mineral line harass points this is mainly due to the large amount of space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger
Conclusion The only way to effectively deal with the early liberators requires you to specifically counter them and even then it's impossible to hard counter the build since getting a spire out at a fast enough time puts you behind in economy as already discussed in this thread, this leaves you with a Ravager opener, unmorphing a liberator takes 1 second and the bile take 2.5 seconds to land meaning someone who is on top of their control can avoid any damage and re-position in a fast enough time to take more shots. It requires 3 corrosive bile to destroy a liberator. It takes roughly 1min and 8 seconds for you to prepare ravagers, and taking my timings from the QXC archon game the first liberator can arrive at 4:50, which means you need to be making a roach warren at 3:42 at the latest, the first time you can confirm the build with 100% certainty is at 3:40 when the armory is placed and when you see no techlab on the starport. Because if you assume it's a liberator off two gas and go for ravagers a hellbat banshee push will probably end up doing crippling damage. The timing window to react is so small that you have to be preparing before this build arrives. Sure you can stop this push, but you will be behind in economy in any method that is effective. A ravager build still isn't effective because for a lot of these spots for them to be in range of the liberator. So the only two builds that have the range for you to counter these spots are ineffective because they put you behind in economy. These spots aren't even essential since you can also siege up in open area for effective damage.
The best conclusion is to remove the liberator for a Valkyrie equivalent and to buff the siege tank for better zone control. Otherwise the fix will be to make everymap having a much larger space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger and constrains the map makers further.
Read the bit about the scouting timings for a 1 base liberator build and the response time for the zerg.
corrosive bile has 9 range, so in most (if not all) of these pictures, ravagers can reach them. its not completely unreasonable to open up with speedlings, get your roach warren, and build 3 roaches until you can confirm that liberators are incoming. ravagers take less than 10 seconds to morph. if they're doing this build, they will be getting double gas, which is a pretty big tell that you're either getting lib'd or medivac tank dropped. if they swap the factory onto a reactor and produce hellions, you'll know you're getting lib'd.
you don't have to directly scout the reactored starport to know whats coming your way if you don't see an expansion
Yes they can reach but they will be in the circle you also only have 2 seconds of time after you scout armory/starport for you to get 3 Ravagers out which is more costly than the method of getting liberators even more so when you don't necessarily want to go down a Roach tech path. What I said isn't about a reactored starport it's about the timing of the armory, scouting 2 gas in the earlygame isn't a tell it could be banshees in which case 3 Ravagers isn't going to do jack squat. The other problem is you need more than 3 ravagers since to get to these spots the ravagers will most likely have to be in the circle and if they focus the ravagers 1 will die before you get in range. People are not using liberators to the full extent possible.
before i address how to handle the libs, i wanna address what i bolded in your post. it is absolutely not more costly to get 3 ravagers than it is to get liberators and hellbats. we'll see what changes in the next patch, but right now, getting liberators and hellbats costs might be cheaper than what the zerg has to do, but in the current patch in order to tech up to reactor liberators w/ the armory or execute the push, your natural expansion is either not coming or EXTREMELY delayed. so if you want to look at the costs of getting out liberators, you also have to consider the fact that this leaves almost no endgame for the terran player.
ok so ill go back a liiiiiitle further in the thread. while spores aren't super useful, they are important to the defense of your base for a push like this for 2 reasons. 1st is that you're right the ravagers can't be in 2 places at once. so having a spore on the base that doesn't have a ton of dead space behind it is perfect to hold you over and force him to reposition and potentially take dmg from the spore or queens while you take care of the other liberator with the ravagers. 2nd, they're also useful so that liberators can't just roll up to your base and completely paint it and prevent you from getting reinforcements. it
which is great because if they're going cloaked banshee, you have a spore up anyway!
and yes, you do have to have more than 3 ravagers, but i wouldn't make more than 3 roaches to start just in case you misread your opponent's build. the first 3 will hold you over until more can come out. you should definitely have a ling move into the area as well so you don't get murdered while you're setting up. for the most part though, the terran player will attempt to unsiege them in which case you won't take dmg.
This is a list of spots that the liberator can stop mining to some capacity without a spore or a queen being able to attack them, the images use a turret to display the 7 range the black line is where the turret reaches to all of the images show untouchable places from 7 range GTA attacks (Queen and Spores) bear in mind stalkers have 6 range so I'm sure these spots are also effective there.
Terraform Main base isn't affected, nor is the natural below is a image of the central more exposed third Here is the other potential third Here is the range from the natural
Bridgehead You can only attack the third mineral line without being affected placing the ATG when there's a double layer is very imprecise since it jumps forward which is why I place the liberator to the side
Orbital Shipyard This is in that pocket natural
Dash and Terminal This is the natural The third behind your natural The forward third, it's not the one that's directly left from the natural the one that is infront of that one. Excuse the lack of the black line I couldn't see the missile turret range on the image but I tested it before I took the photo ingame by building a turret there and seeing if it could attack the liberator
Ruins of Seras This is your natural This is the further away third not the one tucked just forward from the natural/mainbase.
Moonlight Madness This map truly is madness liberators are insanely broken on this map, here's your pocket natural/third The other natural that most people take first The potential third that is in a perfect line with your main and the above natural
Lerilak Crest The only map with 0 mineral line harass points this is mainly due to the large amount of space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger
Conclusion The only way to effectively deal with the early liberators requires you to specifically counter them and even then it's impossible to hard counter the build since getting a spire out at a fast enough time puts you behind in economy as already discussed in this thread, this leaves you with a Ravager opener, unmorphing a liberator takes 1 second and the bile take 2.5 seconds to land meaning someone who is on top of their control can avoid any damage and re-position in a fast enough time to take more shots. It requires 3 corrosive bile to destroy a liberator. It takes roughly 1min and 8 seconds for you to prepare ravagers, and taking my timings from the QXC archon game the first liberator can arrive at 4:50, which means you need to be making a roach warren at 3:42 at the latest, the first time you can confirm the build with 100% certainty is at 3:40 when the armory is placed and when you see no techlab on the starport. Because if you assume it's a liberator off two gas and go for ravagers a hellbat banshee push will probably end up doing crippling damage. The timing window to react is so small that you have to be preparing before this build arrives. Sure you can stop this push, but you will be behind in economy in any method that is effective. A ravager build still isn't effective because for a lot of these spots for them to be in range of the liberator. So the only two builds that have the range for you to counter these spots are ineffective because they put you behind in economy. These spots aren't even essential since you can also siege up in open area for effective damage.
The best conclusion is to remove the liberator for a Valkyrie equivalent and to buff the siege tank for better zone control. Otherwise the fix will be to make everymap having a much larger space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger and constrains the map makers further.
Read the bit about the scouting timings for a 1 base liberator build and the response time for the zerg.
corrosive bile has 9 range, so in most (if not all) of these pictures, ravagers can reach them. its not completely unreasonable to open up with speedlings, get your roach warren, and build 3 roaches until you can confirm that liberators are incoming. ravagers take less than 10 seconds to morph. if they're doing this build, they will be getting double gas, which is a pretty big tell that you're either getting lib'd or medivac tank dropped. if they swap the factory onto a reactor and produce hellions, you'll know you're getting lib'd.
you don't have to directly scout the reactored starport to know whats coming your way if you don't see an expansion
Yes they can reach but they will be in the circle you also only have 2 seconds of time after you scout armory/starport for you to get 3 Ravagers out which is more costly than the method of getting liberators even more so when you don't necessarily want to go down a Roach tech path. What I said isn't about a reactored starport it's about the timing of the armory, scouting 2 gas in the earlygame isn't a tell it could be banshees in which case 3 Ravagers isn't going to do jack squat. The other problem is you need more than 3 ravagers since to get to these spots the ravagers will most likely have to be in the circle and if they focus the ravagers 1 will die before you get in range. People are not using liberators to the full extent possible.
before i address how to handle the libs, i wanna address what i bolded in your post. it is absolutely not more costly to get 3 ravagers than it is to get liberators and hellbats. we'll see what changes in the next patch, but right now, getting liberators and hellbats costs might be cheaper than what the zerg has to do, but in the current patch in order to tech up to reactor liberators w/ the armory or execute the push, your natural expansion is either not coming or EXTREMELY delayed. so if you want to look at the costs of getting out liberators, you also have to consider the fact that this leaves almost no endgame for the terran player.
ok so ill go back a liiiiiitle further in the thread. while spores aren't super useful, they are important to the defense of your base for a push like this for 2 reasons. 1st is that you're right the ravagers can't be in 2 places at once. so having a spore on the base that doesn't have a ton of dead space behind it is perfect to hold you over and force him to reposition and potentially take dmg from the spore or queens while you take care of the other liberator with the ravagers. 2nd, they're also useful so that liberators can't just roll up to your base and completely paint it and prevent you from getting reinforcements. it
which is great because if they're going cloaked banshee, you have a spore up anyway!
and yes, you do have to have more than 3 ravagers, but i wouldn't make more than 3 roaches to start just in case you misread your opponent's build. the first 3 will hold you over until more can come out. you should definitely have a ling move into the area as well so you don't get murdered while you're setting up. for the most part though, the terran player will attempt to unsiege them in which case you won't take dmg.
Why are you saying about Reactored Liberators? They do not require a reactor nor do you want a reactor for the push I am talking about. A cloaked banshee vs the investment to go for ravagers is advantageous to the Terran, the zerg has delayed all their tech/invested into a path they probably do not want to go for where the terran has a smooth transition since he's not invested into any buildings/tech that aren't possible to use in either Mech or bio.
This is a list of spots that the liberator can stop mining to some capacity without a spore or a queen being able to attack them, the images use a turret to display the 7 range the black line is where the turret reaches to all of the images show untouchable places from 7 range GTA attacks (Queen and Spores) bear in mind stalkers have 6 range so I'm sure these spots are also effective there.
Terraform Main base isn't affected, nor is the natural below is a image of the central more exposed third Here is the other potential third Here is the range from the natural
Bridgehead You can only attack the third mineral line without being affected placing the ATG when there's a double layer is very imprecise since it jumps forward which is why I place the liberator to the side
Orbital Shipyard This is in that pocket natural
Dash and Terminal This is the natural The third behind your natural The forward third, it's not the one that's directly left from the natural the one that is infront of that one. Excuse the lack of the black line I couldn't see the missile turret range on the image but I tested it before I took the photo ingame by building a turret there and seeing if it could attack the liberator
Ruins of Seras This is your natural This is the further away third not the one tucked just forward from the natural/mainbase.
Moonlight Madness This map truly is madness liberators are insanely broken on this map, here's your pocket natural/third The other natural that most people take first The potential third that is in a perfect line with your main and the above natural
Lerilak Crest The only map with 0 mineral line harass points this is mainly due to the large amount of space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger
Conclusion The only way to effectively deal with the early liberators requires you to specifically counter them and even then it's impossible to hard counter the build since getting a spire out at a fast enough time puts you behind in economy as already discussed in this thread, this leaves you with a Ravager opener, unmorphing a liberator takes 1 second and the bile take 2.5 seconds to land meaning someone who is on top of their control can avoid any damage and re-position in a fast enough time to take more shots. It requires 3 corrosive bile to destroy a liberator. It takes roughly 1min and 8 seconds for you to prepare ravagers, and taking my timings from the QXC archon game the first liberator can arrive at 4:50, which means you need to be making a roach warren at 3:42 at the latest, the first time you can confirm the build with 100% certainty is at 3:40 when the armory is placed and when you see no techlab on the starport. Because if you assume it's a liberator off two gas and go for ravagers a hellbat banshee push will probably end up doing crippling damage. The timing window to react is so small that you have to be preparing before this build arrives. Sure you can stop this push, but you will be behind in economy in any method that is effective. A ravager build still isn't effective because for a lot of these spots for them to be in range of the liberator. So the only two builds that have the range for you to counter these spots are ineffective because they put you behind in economy. These spots aren't even essential since you can also siege up in open area for effective damage.
The best conclusion is to remove the liberator for a Valkyrie equivalent and to buff the siege tank for better zone control. Otherwise the fix will be to make everymap having a much larger space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger and constrains the map makers further.
Read the bit about the scouting timings for a 1 base liberator build and the response time for the zerg.
corrosive bile has 9 range, so in most (if not all) of these pictures, ravagers can reach them. its not completely unreasonable to open up with speedlings, get your roach warren, and build 3 roaches until you can confirm that liberators are incoming. ravagers take less than 10 seconds to morph. if they're doing this build, they will be getting double gas, which is a pretty big tell that you're either getting lib'd or medivac tank dropped. if they swap the factory onto a reactor and produce hellions, you'll know you're getting lib'd.
you don't have to directly scout the reactored starport to know whats coming your way if you don't see an expansion
Yes they can reach but they will be in the circle you also only have 2 seconds of time after you scout armory/starport for you to get 3 Ravagers out which is more costly than the method of getting liberators even more so when you don't necessarily want to go down a Roach tech path. What I said isn't about a reactored starport it's about the timing of the armory, scouting 2 gas in the earlygame isn't a tell it could be banshees in which case 3 Ravagers isn't going to do jack squat. The other problem is you need more than 3 ravagers since to get to these spots the ravagers will most likely have to be in the circle and if they focus the ravagers 1 will die before you get in range. People are not using liberators to the full extent possible.
before i address how to handle the libs, i wanna address what i bolded in your post. it is absolutely not more costly to get 3 ravagers than it is to get liberators and hellbats. we'll see what changes in the next patch, but right now, getting liberators and hellbats costs might be cheaper than what the zerg has to do, but in the current patch in order to tech up to reactor liberators w/ the armory or execute the push, your natural expansion is either not coming or EXTREMELY delayed. so if you want to look at the costs of getting out liberators, you also have to consider the fact that this leaves almost no endgame for the terran player.
ok so ill go back a liiiiiitle further in the thread. while spores aren't super useful, they are important to the defense of your base for a push like this for 2 reasons. 1st is that you're right the ravagers can't be in 2 places at once. so having a spore on the base that doesn't have a ton of dead space behind it is perfect to hold you over and force him to reposition and potentially take dmg from the spore or queens while you take care of the other liberator with the ravagers. 2nd, they're also useful so that liberators can't just roll up to your base and completely paint it and prevent you from getting reinforcements. it
which is great because if they're going cloaked banshee, you have a spore up anyway!
and yes, you do have to have more than 3 ravagers, but i wouldn't make more than 3 roaches to start just in case you misread your opponent's build. the first 3 will hold you over until more can come out. you should definitely have a ling move into the area as well so you don't get murdered while you're setting up. for the most part though, the terran player will attempt to unsiege them in which case you won't take dmg.
Why are you saying about Reactored Liberators? They do not require a reactor nor do you want a reactor for the push I am talking about. A cloaked banshee vs the investment to go for ravagers is advantageous to the Terran, the zerg has delayed all their tech/invested into a path they probably do not want to go for where the terran has a smooth transition since he's not invested into any buildings/tech that aren't possible to use in either Mech or bio.
if you're not facing a reactor push, you shouldn't have too much trouble holding since there aren't nearly as many liberators killing your stuff. this is the easier hold. as for the cloaked banshee, he's still putting a ton of resources into it and delaying his expansion.
dropping the roach warren is 150 minerals, 200 if you count the drone. not dropping the roach warren is potentially minus ladder points. in addition, ravagers are great at pushing terran players if you're interested in not playing a macro style.
but i truthfully think you're underestimating now much liberator tech puts the terran behind a zerg player.
This is a list of spots that the liberator can stop mining to some capacity without a spore or a queen being able to attack them, the images use a turret to display the 7 range the black line is where the turret reaches to all of the images show untouchable places from 7 range GTA attacks (Queen and Spores) bear in mind stalkers have 6 range so I'm sure these spots are also effective there.
Terraform Main base isn't affected, nor is the natural below is a image of the central more exposed third Here is the other potential third Here is the range from the natural
Bridgehead You can only attack the third mineral line without being affected placing the ATG when there's a double layer is very imprecise since it jumps forward which is why I place the liberator to the side
Orbital Shipyard This is in that pocket natural
Dash and Terminal This is the natural The third behind your natural The forward third, it's not the one that's directly left from the natural the one that is infront of that one. Excuse the lack of the black line I couldn't see the missile turret range on the image but I tested it before I took the photo ingame by building a turret there and seeing if it could attack the liberator
Ruins of Seras This is your natural This is the further away third not the one tucked just forward from the natural/mainbase.
Moonlight Madness This map truly is madness liberators are insanely broken on this map, here's your pocket natural/third The other natural that most people take first The potential third that is in a perfect line with your main and the above natural
Lerilak Crest The only map with 0 mineral line harass points this is mainly due to the large amount of space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger
Conclusion The only way to effectively deal with the early liberators requires you to specifically counter them and even then it's impossible to hard counter the build since getting a spire out at a fast enough time puts you behind in economy as already discussed in this thread, this leaves you with a Ravager opener, unmorphing a liberator takes 1 second and the bile take 2.5 seconds to land meaning someone who is on top of their control can avoid any damage and re-position in a fast enough time to take more shots. It requires 3 corrosive bile to destroy a liberator. It takes roughly 1min and 8 seconds for you to prepare ravagers, and taking my timings from the QXC archon game the first liberator can arrive at 4:50, which means you need to be making a roach warren at 3:42 at the latest, the first time you can confirm the build with 100% certainty is at 3:40 when the armory is placed and when you see no techlab on the starport. Because if you assume it's a liberator off two gas and go for ravagers a hellbat banshee push will probably end up doing crippling damage. The timing window to react is so small that you have to be preparing before this build arrives. Sure you can stop this push, but you will be behind in economy in any method that is effective. A ravager build still isn't effective because for a lot of these spots for them to be in range of the liberator. So the only two builds that have the range for you to counter these spots are ineffective because they put you behind in economy. These spots aren't even essential since you can also siege up in open area for effective damage.
The best conclusion is to remove the liberator for a Valkyrie equivalent and to buff the siege tank for better zone control. Otherwise the fix will be to make everymap having a much larger space behind the mineral lines which makes drop play stronger and constrains the map makers further.
Read the bit about the scouting timings for a 1 base liberator build and the response time for the zerg.
corrosive bile has 9 range, so in most (if not all) of these pictures, ravagers can reach them. its not completely unreasonable to open up with speedlings, get your roach warren, and build 3 roaches until you can confirm that liberators are incoming. ravagers take less than 10 seconds to morph. if they're doing this build, they will be getting double gas, which is a pretty big tell that you're either getting lib'd or medivac tank dropped. if they swap the factory onto a reactor and produce hellions, you'll know you're getting lib'd.
you don't have to directly scout the reactored starport to know whats coming your way if you don't see an expansion
Yes they can reach but they will be in the circle you also only have 2 seconds of time after you scout armory/starport for you to get 3 Ravagers out which is more costly than the method of getting liberators even more so when you don't necessarily want to go down a Roach tech path. What I said isn't about a reactored starport it's about the timing of the armory, scouting 2 gas in the earlygame isn't a tell it could be banshees in which case 3 Ravagers isn't going to do jack squat. The other problem is you need more than 3 ravagers since to get to these spots the ravagers will most likely have to be in the circle and if they focus the ravagers 1 will die before you get in range. People are not using liberators to the full extent possible.
before i address how to handle the libs, i wanna address what i bolded in your post. it is absolutely not more costly to get 3 ravagers than it is to get liberators and hellbats. we'll see what changes in the next patch, but right now, getting liberators and hellbats costs might be cheaper than what the zerg has to do, but in the current patch in order to tech up to reactor liberators w/ the armory or execute the push, your natural expansion is either not coming or EXTREMELY delayed. so if you want to look at the costs of getting out liberators, you also have to consider the fact that this leaves almost no endgame for the terran player.
ok so ill go back a liiiiiitle further in the thread. while spores aren't super useful, they are important to the defense of your base for a push like this for 2 reasons. 1st is that you're right the ravagers can't be in 2 places at once. so having a spore on the base that doesn't have a ton of dead space behind it is perfect to hold you over and force him to reposition and potentially take dmg from the spore or queens while you take care of the other liberator with the ravagers. 2nd, they're also useful so that liberators can't just roll up to your base and completely paint it and prevent you from getting reinforcements. it
which is great because if they're going cloaked banshee, you have a spore up anyway!
and yes, you do have to have more than 3 ravagers, but i wouldn't make more than 3 roaches to start just in case you misread your opponent's build. the first 3 will hold you over until more can come out. you should definitely have a ling move into the area as well so you don't get murdered while you're setting up. for the most part though, the terran player will attempt to unsiege them in which case you won't take dmg.
Why are you saying about Reactored Liberators? They do not require a reactor nor do you want a reactor for the push I am talking about. A cloaked banshee vs the investment to go for ravagers is advantageous to the Terran, the zerg has delayed all their tech/invested into a path they probably do not want to go for where the terran has a smooth transition since he's not invested into any buildings/tech that aren't possible to use in either Mech or bio.
if you're not facing a reactor push, you shouldn't have too much trouble holding since there aren't nearly as many liberators killing your stuff. this is the easier hold. as for the cloaked banshee, he's still putting a ton of resources into it and delaying his expansion.
dropping the roach warren is 150 minerals, 200 if you count the drone. not dropping the roach warren is potentially minus ladder points. in addition, ravagers are great at pushing terran players if you're interested in not playing a macro style.
but i truthfully think you're underestimating now much liberator tech puts the terran behind a zerg player.
I truthfully think you haven't got a clue what you're talking about. Here's some videos watch the SCV count vs the Drone count at the time the Liberator is being produced, this is a more economic Liberator build than the one base I was listing but the zerg is behind in drones or barely ahead depending on their build, when they opened ravagers they were behind and it was 2 base vs 2 base.
in the first replay, they had the exact wrong response to this kind of push which has since been figured out, being that it is a month later and a different patch.
in the second replay, the zerg player loses about 10 workers but he moves into the liberators with the ravagers, gets damage done, and still winds up ahead in economy. they even win the game.
im not sure what you were trying to prove but you're not doing a great job at it lol
On September 02 2015 00:29 BluemoonSC wrote: you posted two VODs from a month ago
in the first replay, they had the exact wrong response to this kind of push which has since been figured out, being that it is a month later and a different patch.
in the second replay, the zerg player loses about 10 workers but he moves into the liberators with the ravagers, gets damage done, and still winds up ahead in economy. they even win the game.
im not sure what you were trying to prove but you're not doing a great job at it lol
I posted those vods because you were talking about how economically behind the terrans are when making that push when they both have the same base amount and worker count. The second replay he loses 6 drones after the first liberator has come out from that hellion attack, the point is even if that didn't happen the zerg isn't massively ahead on economy, they've got the same base count and a 4 worker lead. The terran lost more on economy due to that ling drop than the zerg did from the hellion losses, since the drop stopped two bases mining for the duration and dealt 7 worker damage. They didn't unmorph the liberator nor was it in a good position to defend the ramp, that first liberator shouldn't have been lost they also didn't use the hellions to zone them out or make them into hellbats. They also didn't need to lose that second liberator. Those 3 ravagers moving out on the map is a bad move if they responded correctly by using the liberators offensively, 3 ravagers can't break into that base. So what happened in that game was the terrans playing it poorly, they positioned the defensive liberators badly and didn't use them offensively costing them needless two liberators whilst the zerg was allowed to drone up freely.
The point of the videos was to show you the worker count when a terran is going for a liberator build and they were even the zerg wasn't ahead in economy and they were even on bases.
It just seems too easy for me for T to produce 4-6 liberators in the early-midgame - they seem extremely quick to build and powerful for what they are*. It also seems to cause the colossus effect - oh, he's building a liberator or 2, it's fine. He's building 6? You NEED vikings phoenix/ravagers. I'm not sure to what extent this is true for lack of games and skilled opponents, but they're capable of extremely disgusting trades if you're not careful around them and don't have the proper units to deal with it pre-emptively.
* "what they are" isn't exactly clear either
To quote one of the best players on legacy at the moment
I mentioned that phoenixes appear to be the only counter to the liberator threat. I cannot emphasize how great this is for the gameplay
I disagree with the second part there - and i'm not saying that this is neccesarily how it is or how it will turn out, but i'm cautious of introducing more "colossus effect" dynamics to the game.
For reference of how fast they build, a single starport (which is not at all uncommon in early-midgame terran play even for mech) can build FOUR of them in the same time that it takes a Stargate to make a ONE carrier that only has half of its interceptors functional.
A starport producing liberators is also far lower tier than a fleet beaconed stargate - it's totally within the Terran's power to pull 4-6 liberators out of his/her ass with fairly little warning.
2 days ago I saw Snute playing against early Liberator / Mech Terran. Against Liberator Harass he went Queen Ravager. Later on his Unit Composition was Roach, Ravager, Ultralisk, Viper, Queens and it worked out really well.
On September 02 2015 16:53 cUree wrote: 2 days ago I saw Snute playing against early Liberator / Mech Terran. Against Liberator Harass he went Queen Ravager. Later on his Unit Composition was Roach, Ravager, Ultralisk, Viper, Queens and it worked out really well.
Mech is not the problem here, Bio can be played with Liberator.
On September 02 2015 16:53 cUree wrote: 2 days ago I saw Snute playing against early Liberator / Mech Terran. Against Liberator Harass he went Queen Ravager. Later on his Unit Composition was Roach, Ravager, Ultralisk, Viper, Queens and it worked out really well.
Snute is far above the skill level of the players he faced.
There is not a ton of super high level players on the beta. There's quite a few, but for every one of them there are 10 people who are low master hots that you'll probably hit
Yea that's the problem when 16 liberators are as easy to get as 4 carriers. It quickly becomes quite ridiculous when 5-6 liberators can hugely influence a fight.
In that case the roaches just keep running but much of my interactions with liberators are when they plant the fields somewhere (defensively or offensively as a siege) that you HAVE to run through at which point they're doing insane DPS. I'm afraid for the games where me+ally are not better than almost all opponents we hit and can't establish early air dominance, if that becomes a thing.
16 liberators is pretty hard countered by mass ling/baneling/spores.
They can't touch your base, and you just destroy everything. Because remember: if he's that heavy on the liberators, you can make static d and expand all day long and just make tons and tons of banelings.
Mass zerglings limits the amount of dps they do. Sure; they kill one zergling every hit, but there are a _lot_ of them. And mbanelings in the mix just work so well in destroying shit.
Key is: limit their dps. Mass units with low hp limits their dps.
Key is: limit their dps. Mass units with low hp limits their dps.
Not an option for protoss, where their weakest usable units have roachlike health and cost so the unit doesn't have that weakness
stalker - 125/25, 2-shot
Immortal, 250/100 and a ton of tech building production time (no more chronoboost) - 4-shot
the dps of bio or mech is already quite high alone when hard engaging but with liberator support your entire army does dies immediately if you engage on the ground
we have yet to see that kind of midgame abuse in pro games really
is a good discussion for zvt, i don't feel it's good overall for terran to build 16 liberators but main point is that he doesn't have to, it's fairly free to throw in 6 of them and they are extremely good. You don't need 2starport reactor 16 libs for them to tip the balance of offense/defense
Yea, but many toss are opening with attack upgraded phoenix's every game vs terran (+1 attack is +20% damage upgrade)
anion pulse cannons are probably awesome against them, but that's a deeper investment than it is for terran to make liberators and it kinda forces the colossus dynamic (like i said before - see colossus so you build vikings or die, that's a kinda awkward/bad relationship to have too many of in game)
Key is: limit their dps. Mass units with low hp limits their dps.
Not an option for protoss, where their weakest usable units have roachlike health and cost so the unit doesn't have that weakness
stalker - 125/25, 2-shot
Immortal, 250/100 and a ton of tech building production time (no more chronoboost) - 4-shot
the dps of bio or mech is already quite high alone when hard engaging but with liberator support your entire army does dies immediately if you engage on the ground
we have yet to see that kind of midgame abuse in pro games really
In smaller Liberator numbers blink stalkers demolish them. In larger numbers Phoenix demolish them.
SC2 is about counters (and hard ones usually at that - not a good design but that is what it is). You build Stalkers, I build Marauders. You get lots of HT, I get lots of ghosts. I go mech, you build a few immortals (not tried this in LotV though). You get lots of carriers I go mass widow mine.
Protoss has the tools to deal with Liberators. Stop them from being able to siege with Phoenix, then drop the T's home base with the super-duper Warp Prism and they will soon get out of your face.
Zerg has the tools too - ravagers, vipers, spores etc.
liberators actually get better vs phoenix in greater numbers as they splash anti air - and super-duper warp prism shouldn't be in the game.
tools to counter, i agree - but it's quite a small investment to have to cause that countering in the first place. They can just add 4-6 liberators to any army and it makes a bio or mech siege way stronger, disproportionately so for the build time and cost. I don't think people are having trouble with 30 liberators but that they're very powerful in small numbers
On September 04 2015 05:13 Cyro wrote: liberators actually get better vs phoenix in greater numbers as they splash anti air - and super-duper warp prism shouldn't be in the game.
tools to counter, i agree - but it's quite a small investment to have to cause that countering in the first place. They can just add 4-6 liberators to any army and it makes a bio or mech siege way stronger, disproportionately so for the build time and cost. I don't think people are having trouble with 30 liberators but that they're very powerful in small numbers
unless i'm mistaken, won't right clicking and moving (instead of a-moving) the phoenixes cause them to not stack?
how do void rays do later in the game when you'll likely have a healthy zealot number to ensure that marines are dealing with them and not the rays?
i know tempests are good at dealing with them if they are already set up since they have the same range (if we're talking late game)
unless i'm mistaken, won't right clicking and moving (instead of a-moving) the phoenixes cause them to not stack?
how do void rays do later in the game when you'll likely have a healthy zealot number to ensure that marines are dealing with them and not the rays?
The splash is fairly big and there's usually anti air with them (thors, mines, marines)
liberator is not really the problem, it's how much a medium number of them augment the already standing armies. If there's a wall of liberator anti ground AOE and then behind that there's a mech/bio army and then further behind that are the actual liberators, it adds a huge amount of power in every matchup
i don't even neccesarily mean to argue that they're too strong in their current state, they just feel very accessible and powerful - it's not even enough to say that they're seen often right now, because there's not much of a meta combined with pretty wild MMR swings on ladder (you hit huk one game and some drunk low master guys the next).
On top of that, balance is really wonky in the first place - terran is overall weak at the moment, so out of my ~55 games in GM archon in the current patch i can't recall more than a few balanced games with liberators in the midgame.
If they were too strong, i'd bet that it's in their ease of access, versatility and the amount of power that they bring to any army when you have just 4-6 of them
On September 04 2015 07:55 BluemoonSC wrote: ok well i think we can close this thread now that ravagers can corrosive bile from 13 range :D
Yep, then we can create a thread about how this single change has removed mech from the matchup. I want to try out the new range ravagers along with blinding cloud. He sieges his tanks, I drop blinding cloud on them and move my ravagers into range and destroy every single tank. Tables turned. Similiar for Liberators. Will probably force Terran into bio only.
In some ways it is like a MOBA. In a MOBA I try to find the broken hero/ability and abuse that. In SC2 we should drop our attachment to a particular race and seek to have fun with the imbalances that exist.
Does anyone know if they have 13 vision, or lower vision like a siege tank and need a spotter?
Siege units are meant to be disproportionately strong when sieged. Run your units into to 4-6 BW tanks supported by an army and see if they feel like 150/100/2 units.
But your complaint wasn't about production speed or mobility, it was about their strength in main army engagements when sieged.
And that's the one thing that shouldn't be nerfed. More deathballs ramming into each other are the last thing this game needs. Anything that promotes more careful positioning and unit movement, spreading your army, slowing the pace of big fights down, and just generally pushing the tempo towards the BW-end of things is to be desired.
So if they come out too early or build too fast, address that, but don't kill what makes them interesting.
But your complaint wasn't about production speed or mobility
Sure it was. A huge part of the strength of the liberator comes from how easy they are to access and produce a decent number of them as well as how they're fast and have both AA and AG attacks. Strength in a niche is fine, strength in 5 niches at the same time is dangeorus if it turns out that way
On September 04 2015 19:37 Athenau wrote: Siege units are meant to be disproportionately strong when sieged. Run your units into to 4-6 BW tanks supported by an army and see if they feel like 150/100/2 units.
Liberators cost 150/150
As for the unit itself I think its fine, there quite the counter play out there, I think a good change would be to up the supply to 3, make them build a little bit slower like 10 sec or so and maybe make it a little more expensive (like 175/150 or 200/150 or something)
They would still be strong but they would be more of an investment, losing them would be more costly and it would be harder to mass them, while still mantaining the strenght and rewarding players that are agressive with them.
This unit has all the makings of a unit that starts out OP, people complain, figure out how to counter it easily, then it gets used much less. Already I went from almost always doing massive early damage to mineral lines to now having people shut this down quite easily. Lower level players will find this unit frustrating though because you need to be aware of it and micro.
Question is do they nerf it or just let people figure out handling it.
There's no reason for it to benefit from a reactor when it already has such a small build time. There's just so many things about it that seem kinda fine alone but when compared to other units, there's actually been a lot of power creep
The liberator build time is not even close to "fast". It's 43 lotv second (60 for hots). This is as much as a banshee or a thor. It can be reactored, but please stop with the fast build time nonsense.
You can build four liberators in the time it takes to build 1 carrier.
Thors and banshees require a tech lab, therefore they take literally twice as long or twice as many buildings to make - And thor build time is disproportionately fast if that's the case.
I think everyone will agree that 8 liberators is a whole lot more scary than 4 banshees, yet they're produced by the same building in the same amount of time
You can build four liberators in the time it takes to build 1 carrier.
You're being retarded. Lotv carrier build time is 63s and it can be chronoobosted. Of course, if you imply terran has 2 reactored starport for each stargate, then you're right.
Ah they reduced the build time and i didn't notice for lack of chrono. It's now 1 carrier per 3 liberators, not 1 carrier per 4 liberators (if you have one of each building).
It's better to compare to Banshee. Liberator has the same build time and more power/versatility yet it can be reactored. No point going cross-race for examples if they have one on the same building!
Nobody is building Banshees, it's always liberator rush, liberator harass etc. I have not even seen a Banshee or a Colossus in 80 games, yet i've seen hundreds of Liberators.
If I were as biased as you, I'd tell you that the liberator build time is way too slow because it's about the same as a chronoboosted carrier... and carriers are obv a lot more scary. Ofc I'm not mentionning the fact that it requires a lot more tech and it's way more expensive.
The build time is fine. They could unlock the ag mode by an upgrade in the techlab as a replacement for the armory so you can't mass them as fast in the early game for their anti ground, but that's all imo. Their aa is mediocre at best. It's good as a support unit but that's all.
Banshees are still used a lot for TvT btw. But they kinda suck vs protoss so you're not going to see them anytime soon !
as a zerg player, i rarely see someone going for banshee over reactored liberators so i see the point he's trying to make. i think DK's analysis of the unit is a bit overstated. sure, you can get them out really fast, but that's not what makes them OP.
what makes people feel like they're OP is that you can use them in any composition and at such a long range.
this makes it easy to use with a 200/200 army BUT more difficult to defend. that's where i think it's OP, not while you're reactoring them out off of 1 base while securing your expansion. i'll just roach you :D
They (banshees) suck vs zerg compared to liberators too.
A liberator vs carrier are completely different classes of units - one of them is a 2 supply unit accessible in the early/midgame and easily mass produced, while the other is the most expensive 6-supply unit in the game.
If I were as biased as you
You're being retarded.
---
Abusive ad hominem usually involves attacking the traits of an opponent as a means to invalidate their arguments. Equating someone's character with the soundness of their argument is a logical fallacy.
And i don't hate the unit, i think it's just "slightly too good" in quite a few areas at the same time, potentially even by design for the beta.
Edit: as you said, carriers and liberators are completely differents units with different purposes and shouldn't be compared, so why do you keep doing it and then contradict yourself ?
Anyway, all of this is pretty pointless currently since you can go 2 gates adept pylon rush in any mu and wreck everything till people find a way to handle this shit.
he was probably comparing them because its slightly unusual that you can get out twice the supply and twice the resources (liberators) in almost half the time as it takes to build a carrier.
but i actually didn't realize carrier build time was reduced also
there's a gamebreaking build in ZvT that you cannot cost efficiently counter, a gas before rax build where even if you cut all possible corners such as ling scout, go for fastest possible lair even before speedling upgrade, you're still gonna lose mining time and with that the game because of the current terran econ boost
the only thing you can do is attack and hope he doesn't keep 1 liberator at home for defense (you have 2 by 4.30 harassing mineral line)
even if you go for the fastest possible ravager upgrade off of gas before pool, you're still gonna be losing ravagers on certain maps while attempting to get shots off (say hello to 15 range liberators). If you try to skip roaches and speed, then he still has hellions behind it and any smart terran will runby and kill your drones
I'd go as far as to say that this is far more gamebreaking than hellbat drops in early hots ever were, to the point where I am probably going to quit every time I see this build because I already know the outcome. The fact that blind countering and knowing the build doesn't give you any better chances makes it completely imbalanced so early on. Not to mention that on certain positions liberators can hit eggs so you cannot even bring production out to deal with it (happens if you try going fastest mutas off 2 base).
I've already stated it before, liberators are either gonna need a decently long upgrade timing on ATG mode or at least have them require a fusion core
On September 06 2015 06:05 EonuS wrote: there's a gamebreaking build in ZvT that you cannot cost efficiently counter, a gas before rax build where even if you cut all possible corners such as ling scout, go for fastest possible lair even before speedling upgrade, you're still gonna lose mining time and with that the game because of the current terran econ boost
the only thing you can do is attack and hope he doesn't keep 1 liberator at home for defense (you have 2 by 4.30 harassing mineral line)
even if you go for the fastest possible ravager upgrade off of gas before pool, you're still gonna be losing ravagers on certain maps while attempting to get shots off (say hello to 15 range liberators). If you try to skip roaches and speed, then he still has hellions behind it and any smart terran will runby and kill your drones
I'd go as far as to say that this is far more gamebreaking than hellbat drops in early hots ever were, to the point where I am probably going to quit every time I see this build because I already know the outcome. The fact that blind countering and knowing the build doesn't give you any better chances makes it completely imbalanced so early on. Not to mention that on certain positions liberators can hit eggs so you cannot even bring production out to deal with it (happens if you try going fastest mutas off 2 base).
I've already stated it before, liberators are either gonna need a decently long upgrade timing on ATG mode or at least have them require a fusion core
Fusion core strikes me as unnecessary, I feel a better nerf would be raw numbers at this point, something like slightly reducing the atg radius would probably go a long way to countering it, or maybe reduce the range on it slightly?
Not too sure, something as simple as requiring a damn tech lab would do the trick, but honestly the unit isn't too too OP, Ravagers deal with it handily and Roach/Hydra/Viper is a whole new composition with Lurkers added in.
On September 06 2015 06:05 EonuS wrote: there's a gamebreaking build in ZvT that you cannot cost efficiently counter, a gas before rax build where even if you cut all possible corners such as ling scout, go for fastest possible lair even before speedling upgrade, you're still gonna lose mining time and with that the game because of the current terran econ boost
the only thing you can do is attack and hope he doesn't keep 1 liberator at home for defense (you have 2 by 4.30 harassing mineral line)
even if you go for the fastest possible ravager upgrade off of gas before pool, you're still gonna be losing ravagers on certain maps while attempting to get shots off (say hello to 15 range liberators). If you try to skip roaches and speed, then he still has hellions behind it and any smart terran will runby and kill your drones
I'd go as far as to say that this is far more gamebreaking than hellbat drops in early hots ever were, to the point where I am probably going to quit every time I see this build because I already know the outcome. The fact that blind countering and knowing the build doesn't give you any better chances makes it completely imbalanced so early on. Not to mention that on certain positions liberators can hit eggs so you cannot even bring production out to deal with it (happens if you try going fastest mutas off 2 base).
I've already stated it before, liberators are either gonna need a decently long upgrade timing on ATG mode or at least have them require a fusion core
Fusion core strikes me as unnecessary, I feel a better nerf would be raw numbers at this point, something like slightly reducing the atg radius would probably go a long way to countering it, or maybe reduce the range on it slightly?
Not too sure, something as simple as requiring a damn tech lab would do the trick, but honestly the unit isn't too too OP, Ravagers deal with it handily and Roach/Hydra/Viper is a whole new composition with Lurkers added in.
I think you don't yet grasp how early in the game this can hit your minreal line. None of the suggestions above will affect the rush, you're still going to have to pull drones away from your mineral line while terran is happily building his economy up (it's far more apparent how broken this rush is with the re-addition of mules)
I don't have problems with liberator past the early game, but the fact that unit this strong can hit mineral line so early that I can't even deal with when I cut all the corners is what really bothers me
On September 06 2015 06:05 EonuS wrote: there's a gamebreaking build in ZvT that you cannot cost efficiently counter, a gas before rax build where even if you cut all possible corners such as ling scout, go for fastest possible lair even before speedling upgrade, you're still gonna lose mining time and with that the game because of the current terran econ boost
the only thing you can do is attack and hope he doesn't keep 1 liberator at home for defense (you have 2 by 4.30 harassing mineral line)
even if you go for the fastest possible ravager upgrade off of gas before pool, you're still gonna be losing ravagers on certain maps while attempting to get shots off (say hello to 15 range liberators). If you try to skip roaches and speed, then he still has hellions behind it and any smart terran will runby and kill your drones
I'd go as far as to say that this is far more gamebreaking than hellbat drops in early hots ever were, to the point where I am probably going to quit every time I see this build because I already know the outcome. The fact that blind countering and knowing the build doesn't give you any better chances makes it completely imbalanced so early on. Not to mention that on certain positions liberators can hit eggs so you cannot even bring production out to deal with it (happens if you try going fastest mutas off 2 base).
I've already stated it before, liberators are either gonna need a decently long upgrade timing on ATG mode or at least have them require a fusion core
Fusion core strikes me as unnecessary, I feel a better nerf would be raw numbers at this point, something like slightly reducing the atg radius would probably go a long way to countering it, or maybe reduce the range on it slightly?
Not too sure, something as simple as requiring a damn tech lab would do the trick, but honestly the unit isn't too too OP, Ravagers deal with it handily and Roach/Hydra/Viper is a whole new composition with Lurkers added in.
I think you don't yet grasp how early in the game this can hit your minreal line. None of the suggestions above will affect the rush, you're still going to have to pull drones away from your mineral line while terran is happily building his economy up (it's far more apparent how broken this rush is with the re-addition of mules)
I don't have problems with liberator past the early game, but the fact that unit this strong can hit mineral line so early that I can't even deal with when I cut all the corners is what really bothers me
Oh I do know lol they hit very early, I was actually more along your train of thought until I watched a very recent Lowko ZvT where he deals with the early Liberator/Hellbat play VERY effectively.
Lowko might not be a pro player, but he's a relatively high level player, so if it works at his level, it works for ours, I definitely have better play against them.
Even if they are perfectly balanced, playing against liberators is not very fun when the entire screen can be instantly transformed into a siege area. I played a TvZ making only marines and mass liberators, and just expanded with planetaries and turrets. I was invincible. Playing against T as Z on the other hand, I don't even know what to build. Hydras? Corrupters? Mutas? Bleh. I haven't played since WOL and it seems the annoying parts of the game have gotten way stronger, such as insta lose harass vs no viable options for counter pressure.
On September 06 2015 06:05 EonuS wrote: there's a gamebreaking build in ZvT that you cannot cost efficiently counter, a gas before rax build where even if you cut all possible corners such as ling scout, go for fastest possible lair even before speedling upgrade, you're still gonna lose mining time and with that the game because of the current terran econ boost
the only thing you can do is attack and hope he doesn't keep 1 liberator at home for defense (you have 2 by 4.30 harassing mineral line)
even if you go for the fastest possible ravager upgrade off of gas before pool, you're still gonna be losing ravagers on certain maps while attempting to get shots off (say hello to 15 range liberators). If you try to skip roaches and speed, then he still has hellions behind it and any smart terran will runby and kill your drones
I'd go as far as to say that this is far more gamebreaking than hellbat drops in early hots ever were, to the point where I am probably going to quit every time I see this build because I already know the outcome. The fact that blind countering and knowing the build doesn't give you any better chances makes it completely imbalanced so early on. Not to mention that on certain positions liberators can hit eggs so you cannot even bring production out to deal with it (happens if you try going fastest mutas off 2 base).
I've already stated it before, liberators are either gonna need a decently long upgrade timing on ATG mode or at least have them require a fusion core
Yeah I know this build and you don't deal wth it by doing fast muta. On certain maps it sucks, but it's by no means game breaking. Whats your build? What supply are you getting your 2nd gas and roach warren?
Playing against Liberator is nothing but demotivating. They counter almost every Ground Unit, they almost nullify Mutalisks. Especially now that Terran begins playing Bio again.
I've only played 10 games, am ranked platinum so take my opinion with a grain of salt.
As a terran player, I just think a liberator is a bit too, idk, easy? I just hit E and its like an air siege tank for the terran that moves really really quickly and can harass quite easily. It just takes away the most fun aspect of tvz in Heart of the Swarm which was the micro, the marines and widow mines against the banelings and mutalisks. Maybe its just the level of players I'm playing against but still the liberator needs to be worked a bit. I think decreasing its speed might be important and also think that its attack radius should be decreased so that the zerg can split and still effectively fight the terran army.
As for the early game harass potential, zerg pretty much has to go spore crawlers. I think making it a tech lab unit might be interesting, but then I think terrans will just shift to bio tank instead of bio liberator. And go for early game tank drops. I'm still kinda opposed to the lift siege tanks straight into medivacs change.
On September 06 2015 06:05 EonuS wrote: there's a gamebreaking build in ZvT that you cannot cost efficiently counter, a gas before rax build where even if you cut all possible corners such as ling scout, go for fastest possible lair even before speedling upgrade, you're still gonna lose mining time and with that the game because of the current terran econ boost
the only thing you can do is attack and hope he doesn't keep 1 liberator at home for defense (you have 2 by 4.30 harassing mineral line)
even if you go for the fastest possible ravager upgrade off of gas before pool, you're still gonna be losing ravagers on certain maps while attempting to get shots off (say hello to 15 range liberators). If you try to skip roaches and speed, then he still has hellions behind it and any smart terran will runby and kill your drones
I'd go as far as to say that this is far more gamebreaking than hellbat drops in early hots ever were, to the point where I am probably going to quit every time I see this build because I already know the outcome. The fact that blind countering and knowing the build doesn't give you any better chances makes it completely imbalanced so early on. Not to mention that on certain positions liberators can hit eggs so you cannot even bring production out to deal with it (happens if you try going fastest mutas off 2 base).
I've already stated it before, liberators are either gonna need a decently long upgrade timing on ATG mode or at least have them require a fusion core
Fusion core strikes me as unnecessary, I feel a better nerf would be raw numbers at this point, something like slightly reducing the atg radius would probably go a long way to countering it, or maybe reduce the range on it slightly?
Not too sure, something as simple as requiring a damn tech lab would do the trick, but honestly the unit isn't too too OP, Ravagers deal with it handily and Roach/Hydra/Viper is a whole new composition with Lurkers added in.
I think you don't yet grasp how early in the game this can hit your minreal line. None of the suggestions above will affect the rush, you're still going to have to pull drones away from your mineral line while terran is happily building his economy up (it's far more apparent how broken this rush is with the re-addition of mules)
I don't have problems with liberator past the early game, but the fact that unit this strong can hit mineral line so early that I can't even deal with when I cut all the corners is what really bothers me
Oh I do know lol they hit very early, I was actually more along your train of thought until I watched a very recent Lowko ZvT where he deals with the early Liberator/Hellbat play VERY effectively.
Lowko might not be a pro player, but he's a relatively high level player, so if it works at his level, it works for ours, I definitely have better play against them.
I am a mid/high gm player in lotv currently and there are individuals who have done this build day in day out so they don't screw up their micro on them. I've practically tried everything, including trying to grab an extremely fast upgrade for ravagers (good luck trying with 9 range, you can just leave the game). Even if you defend the build efficiently, you are still behind on economy because you just cut a lot of minerals to get the gas needed for ravagers that early on while terran has compensation with both mules and supply drops.
On September 06 2015 06:05 EonuS wrote: there's a gamebreaking build in ZvT that you cannot cost efficiently counter, a gas before rax build where even if you cut all possible corners such as ling scout, go for fastest possible lair even before speedling upgrade, you're still gonna lose mining time and with that the game because of the current terran econ boost
the only thing you can do is attack and hope he doesn't keep 1 liberator at home for defense (you have 2 by 4.30 harassing mineral line)
even if you go for the fastest possible ravager upgrade off of gas before pool, you're still gonna be losing ravagers on certain maps while attempting to get shots off (say hello to 15 range liberators). If you try to skip roaches and speed, then he still has hellions behind it and any smart terran will runby and kill your drones
I'd go as far as to say that this is far more gamebreaking than hellbat drops in early hots ever were, to the point where I am probably going to quit every time I see this build because I already know the outcome. The fact that blind countering and knowing the build doesn't give you any better chances makes it completely imbalanced so early on. Not to mention that on certain positions liberators can hit eggs so you cannot even bring production out to deal with it (happens if you try going fastest mutas off 2 base).
I've already stated it before, liberators are either gonna need a decently long upgrade timing on ATG mode or at least have them require a fusion core
Fusion core strikes me as unnecessary, I feel a better nerf would be raw numbers at this point, something like slightly reducing the atg radius would probably go a long way to countering it, or maybe reduce the range on it slightly?
Not too sure, something as simple as requiring a damn tech lab would do the trick, but honestly the unit isn't too too OP, Ravagers deal with it handily and Roach/Hydra/Viper is a whole new composition with Lurkers added in.
I think you don't yet grasp how early in the game this can hit your minreal line. None of the suggestions above will affect the rush, you're still going to have to pull drones away from your mineral line while terran is happily building his economy up (it's far more apparent how broken this rush is with the re-addition of mules)
I don't have problems with liberator past the early game, but the fact that unit this strong can hit mineral line so early that I can't even deal with when I cut all the corners is what really bothers me
Oh I do know lol they hit very early, I was actually more along your train of thought until I watched a very recent Lowko ZvT where he deals with the early Liberator/Hellbat play VERY effectively.
Lowko might not be a pro player, but he's a relatively high level player, so if it works at his level, it works for ours, I definitely have better play against them.
I am a mid/high gm player in lotv currently and there are individuals who have done this build day in day out so they don't screw up their micro on them. I've practically tried everything, including trying to grab an extremely fast upgrade for ravagers (good luck trying with 9 range, you can just leave the game). Even if you defend the build efficiently, you are still behind on economy because you just cut a lot of minerals to get the gas needed for ravagers that early on while terran has compensation with both mules and supply drops.
Is there a replay you can post so I can see it in action? I haven't had a terrible time defending against these pushes and sometimes when I play against a terran I almost hope they do it to me lol
On September 06 2015 06:05 EonuS wrote: there's a gamebreaking build in ZvT that you cannot cost efficiently counter, a gas before rax build where even if you cut all possible corners such as ling scout, go for fastest possible lair even before speedling upgrade, you're still gonna lose mining time and with that the game because of the current terran econ boost
the only thing you can do is attack and hope he doesn't keep 1 liberator at home for defense (you have 2 by 4.30 harassing mineral line)
even if you go for the fastest possible ravager upgrade off of gas before pool, you're still gonna be losing ravagers on certain maps while attempting to get shots off (say hello to 15 range liberators). If you try to skip roaches and speed, then he still has hellions behind it and any smart terran will runby and kill your drones
I'd go as far as to say that this is far more gamebreaking than hellbat drops in early hots ever were, to the point where I am probably going to quit every time I see this build because I already know the outcome. The fact that blind countering and knowing the build doesn't give you any better chances makes it completely imbalanced so early on. Not to mention that on certain positions liberators can hit eggs so you cannot even bring production out to deal with it (happens if you try going fastest mutas off 2 base).
I've already stated it before, liberators are either gonna need a decently long upgrade timing on ATG mode or at least have them require a fusion core
Fusion core strikes me as unnecessary, I feel a better nerf would be raw numbers at this point, something like slightly reducing the atg radius would probably go a long way to countering it, or maybe reduce the range on it slightly?
Not too sure, something as simple as requiring a damn tech lab would do the trick, but honestly the unit isn't too too OP, Ravagers deal with it handily and Roach/Hydra/Viper is a whole new composition with Lurkers added in.
I think you don't yet grasp how early in the game this can hit your minreal line. None of the suggestions above will affect the rush, you're still going to have to pull drones away from your mineral line while terran is happily building his economy up (it's far more apparent how broken this rush is with the re-addition of mules)
I don't have problems with liberator past the early game, but the fact that unit this strong can hit mineral line so early that I can't even deal with when I cut all the corners is what really bothers me
Oh I do know lol they hit very early, I was actually more along your train of thought until I watched a very recent Lowko ZvT where he deals with the early Liberator/Hellbat play VERY effectively.
Lowko might not be a pro player, but he's a relatively high level player, so if it works at his level, it works for ours, I definitely have better play against them.
I am a mid/high gm player in lotv currently and there are individuals who have done this build day in day out so they don't screw up their micro on them. I've practically tried everything, including trying to grab an extremely fast upgrade for ravagers (good luck trying with 9 range, you can just leave the game). Even if you defend the build efficiently, you are still behind on economy because you just cut a lot of minerals to get the gas needed for ravagers that early on while terran has compensation with both mules and supply drops.
Is there a replay you can post so I can see it in action? I haven't had a terrible time defending against these pushes and sometimes when I play against a terran I almost hope they do it to me lol
Dont do that man, saying "Iam Uberskilled" isnt as cool as you might think. All this liberator wont stay anyway
On September 06 2015 20:03 WidowMineHero wrote: yes... reactor liberators are insane...
Reactor-hate is hilarious, especially when hated by Zergs, who have larva-based production, lol.
Reactors offer a one-time per game savings of 100/50/0, per non-Barracks Reactor-structure (compared to building an additional structure). It adds 50 gas per_reactor Barracks. This helps offset the fact that Terran production is more expensive than Zerg or Protoss production, and that all non-Reactor units require an additional 50/25/25 techlab investment per productions structure. It is also designed to help save space because the production footprint is large, and it's relatively important to have it centralized (we don't have warpgates, we don't have creep, don't have AG static defense).
The Reactor with Libs are not an issue on one base, because you can't Reactor Libs on one base.
On September 06 2015 20:03 WidowMineHero wrote: yes... reactor liberators are insane...
Reactor-hate is hilarious, especially when hated by Zergs, who have larva-based production, lol.
Reactors offer a one-time per game savings of 100/50/0, per non-Barracks Reactor-structure (compared to building an additional structure). It adds 50 gas per_reactor Barracks. This helps offset the fact that Terran production is more expensive than Zerg or Protoss production, and that all non-Reactor units require an additional 50/25/25 techlab investment per productions structure. It is also designed to help save space because the production footprint is large, and it's relatively important to have it centralized (we don't have warpgates, we don't have creep, don't have AG static defense).
The Reactor with Libs are not an issue on one base, because you can't Reactor Libs on one base.
On September 06 2015 20:03 WidowMineHero wrote: yes... reactor liberators are insane...
Reactor-hate is hilarious, especially when hated by Zergs, who have larva-based production, lol.
Reactors offer a one-time per game savings of 100/50/0, per non-Barracks Reactor-structure (compared to building an additional structure). It adds 50 gas per_reactor Barracks. This helps offset the fact that Terran production is more expensive than Zerg or Protoss production, and that all non-Reactor units require an additional 50/25/25 techlab investment per productions structure. It is also designed to help save space because the production footprint is large, and it's relatively important to have it centralized (we don't have warpgates, we don't have creep, don't have AG static defense).
The Reactor with Libs are not an issue on one base, because you can't Reactor Libs on one base.
On September 06 2015 20:03 WidowMineHero wrote: yes... reactor liberators are insane...
Reactor-hate is hilarious, especially when hated by Zergs, who have larva-based production, lol.
Reactors offer a one-time per game savings of 100/50/0, per non-Barracks Reactor-structure (compared to building an additional structure). It adds 50 gas per_reactor Barracks. This helps offset the fact that Terran production is more expensive than Zerg or Protoss production, and that all non-Reactor units require an additional 50/25/25 techlab investment per productions structure. It is also designed to help save space because the production footprint is large, and it's relatively important to have it centralized (we don't have warpgates, we don't have creep, don't have AG static defense).
The Reactor with Libs are not an issue on one base, because you can't Reactor Libs on one base.
You're gold league aren't you?
Lol. The classic "credentials?" go-to for forum discussion. Well played. Plat in WoL (low Diamond), stopped playing in HotS (too addictive) so hovered between Gold and Plat, and in LotV beta I don't really play 1v1 (so I think I'm Gold last time I checked?) ... we mainly focus on our GrandMaster Archon Mode team ; )
This helps offset the fact that Terran production is more expensive than Zerg or Protoss production
Zerg has their own production style; i don't know on what basis you're saying that terran production is more costly than protoss
Right. Asymmetric production schemes. Terran production just costs more ... I mean, that's not a controversial statement is it? SCV build time, can be canceled / harassed, sometimes an extra SCV has to pull, add-ons cost x/x/x I mean ...
On September 06 2015 20:03 WidowMineHero wrote: yes... reactor liberators are insane...
Reactor-hate is hilarious, especially when hated by Zergs, who have larva-based production, lol.
Reactors offer a one-time per game savings of 100/50/0, per non-Barracks Reactor-structure (compared to building an additional structure). It adds 50 gas per_reactor Barracks. This helps offset the fact that Terran production is more expensive than Zerg or Protoss production, and that all non-Reactor units require an additional 50/25/25 techlab investment per productions structure. It is also designed to help save space because the production footprint is large, and it's relatively important to have it centralized (we don't have warpgates, we don't have creep, don't have AG static defense).
The Reactor with Libs are not an issue on one base, because you can't Reactor Libs on one base.
You're gold league aren't you?
Lol. The classic "credentials?" go-to for forum discussion. Well played. Plat in WoL (low Diamond), stopped playing in HotS (too addictive) so hovered between Gold and Plat, and in LotV beta I don't really play 1v1 (so I think I'm Gold last time I checked?) ... we mainly focus on our GrandMaster Archon Mode team ; )
This helps offset the fact that Terran production is more expensive than Zerg or Protoss production
Zerg has their own production style; i don't know on what basis you're saying that terran production is more costly than protoss
Right. Asymmetric production schemes. Terran production just costs more ... I mean, that's not a controversial statement is it? SCV build time, can be canceled / harassed, sometimes an extra SCV has to pull, add-ons cost x/x/x I mean ...
And with that I don't need to say anything more, my point has been proven for me.
On September 06 2015 20:03 WidowMineHero wrote: yes... reactor liberators are insane...
Reactor-hate is hilarious, especially when hated by Zergs, who have larva-based production, lol.
Reactors offer a one-time per game savings of 100/50/0, per non-Barracks Reactor-structure (compared to building an additional structure). It adds 50 gas per_reactor Barracks. This helps offset the fact that Terran production is more expensive than Zerg or Protoss production, and that all non-Reactor units require an additional 50/25/25 techlab investment per productions structure. It is also designed to help save space because the production footprint is large, and it's relatively important to have it centralized (we don't have warpgates, we don't have creep, don't have AG static defense).
The Reactor with Libs are not an issue on one base, because you can't Reactor Libs on one base.
You're gold league aren't you?
Lol. The classic "credentials?" go-to for forum discussion. Well played. Plat in WoL (low Diamond), stopped playing in HotS (too addictive) so hovered between Gold and Plat, and in LotV beta I don't really play 1v1 (so I think I'm Gold last time I checked?) ... we mainly focus on our GrandMaster Archon Mode team ; )
On September 07 2015 01:35 Cyro wrote:
This helps offset the fact that Terran production is more expensive than Zerg or Protoss production
Zerg has their own production style; i don't know on what basis you're saying that terran production is more costly than protoss
Right. Asymmetric production schemes. Terran production just costs more ... I mean, that's not a controversial statement is it? SCV build time, can be canceled / harassed, sometimes an extra SCV has to pull, add-ons cost x/x/x I mean ...
And with that I don't need to say anything more, my point has been proven for me.
The liberator replaces the Thor for anti-muta purposes. 2 liberators are roughly equivalent to a Thor both in cost and effectiveness making reactorable liberators a necessity.
On September 07 2015 01:35 Cyro wrote: i don't know on what basis you're saying that terran production is more costly than protoss
SCV mining time losses alone makes it true. This was one of the reasons mule-less terran was so awful.
Terran stuff is quite cheap though, especially on gas. Most toss midgame styles have obscene amounts of money in robo or other techs to head off bio+medivac
On September 07 2015 05:18 Cyro wrote: Terran stuff is quite cheap though, especially on gas. The building prices are kinda low to compensate for that and the big drain of supply depots was not a problem with mule-less terran and each depot giving 16 supply
Man, I really don't want to have this argument, but terran building prices are not relatively low when you take into account addons, number higher tech buildings bring made and scv building time losses. It's not some massive difference but terran infrastructure is not cheap.
On September 07 2015 05:18 Cyro wrote: Terran stuff is quite cheap though, especially on gas. The building prices are kinda low to compensate for that and the big drain of supply depots was not a problem with mule-less terran and each depot giving 16 supply
The Terran production scheme is the most expensive of the three, not saying it is overly or unfairly expensive. Because as you pointed out, this expensive production price is offset by some of the other racial idiosyncrasies.
People are so damned sensitive around here. That's racial tension for ya.
On September 07 2015 05:18 Cyro wrote: Terran stuff is quite cheap though, especially on gas. The building prices are kinda low to compensate for that and the big drain of supply depots was not a problem with mule-less terran and each depot giving 16 supply
Man, I really don't want to have this argument, but terran building prices are not relatively low when you take into account addons, number higher tech buildings bring made and scv building time losses. It's not some massive difference but terran infrastructure is not cheap.
It's just math, so it's not even really worth arguing (I just thought this was a supremely obvious given, but I guess not) but it makes people some people feel bad to give any ground in any argument ever. *shrugs*
I'm wrong all the time, as evidenced by my lengthy post history of being wrong : D But I try to learn along the way.
It varies so much with the styles and maps that you can't even make a statement like that i think (T or P spending way more on production/research than the other)
On September 07 2015 05:42 Cyro wrote: It varies so much with the styles and maps that you can't even make a statement like that i think (T or P spending way more on production/research than the other)
Come on, Cyro. I'm not being hyperbolic here. I was responding to what I consider to be irrational Reactor-hate. So I stated, that, "[reactor] helps offset the fact that Terran production is more expensive than Zerg or Protoss production". It's just a little funny to me that people will complain about reactors when they have Larva, Warpgates, and Chronoboost. That's all.
Liberators are allowing Terrans to turtle in TvZ. They mass siege tanks with them and get both air and ground control. This forces you into a boring game that lasts 15+ minutes, until you get broodlord corruptor viper to break them with parasitic bombs.
We are just 1 step away of seeing cancer mech again.
On September 07 2015 05:42 Cyro wrote: It varies so much with the styles and maps that you can't even make a statement like that i think (T or P spending way more on production/research than the other)
Come on, Cyro. I'm not being hyperbolic here. I was responding to what I consider to be irrational Reactor-hate. So I stated, that, "[reactor] helps offset the fact that Terran production is more expensive than Zerg or Protoss production". It's just a little funny to me that people will complain about reactors when they have Larva, Warpgates, and Chronoboost. That's all.
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.
Didn't realize you was referring to anything in particular aside from absolute statement about terran having the most money spend on production in midgame.
Of course i have no problem with reactors existing - it would just be ridiculous if you could Reactor siege tanks, for example.
On September 07 2015 05:42 Cyro wrote: It varies so much with the styles and maps that you can't even make a statement like that i think (T or P spending way more on production/research than the other)
Come on, Cyro. I'm not being hyperbolic here. I was responding to what I consider to be irrational Reactor-hate. So I stated, that, "[reactor] helps offset the fact that Terran production is more expensive than Zerg or Protoss production". It's just a little funny to me that people will complain about reactors when they have Larva, Warpgates, and Chronoboost. That's all.
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.
Didn't realize I was worthy of further response from the esteemed Ovid. *bows*
And for your example: I get what you're trying to say, except that I have zero of two ordered-Liberators until 43 seconds have elapsed.
On September 07 2015 05:42 Cyro wrote: It varies so much with the styles and maps that you can't even make a statement like that i think (T or P spending way more on production/research than the other)
Come on, Cyro. I'm not being hyperbolic here. I was responding to what I consider to be irrational Reactor-hate. So I stated, that, "[reactor] helps offset the fact that Terran production is more expensive than Zerg or Protoss production". It's just a little funny to me that people will complain about reactors when they have Larva, Warpgates, and Chronoboost. That's all.
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.
You can't chop a reactorable unit's construction time in half. A reactor is like having a second production building not a super chronoboost. The result may be the same but the production timing is important in the game.
The cost and tech requirements of the Liberator are also much higher than that of a marauder.
On September 07 2015 05:42 Cyro wrote: It varies so much with the styles and maps that you can't even make a statement like that i think (T or P spending way more on production/research than the other)
Come on, Cyro. I'm not being hyperbolic here. I was responding to what I consider to be irrational Reactor-hate. So I stated, that, "[reactor] helps offset the fact that Terran production is more expensive than Zerg or Protoss production". It's just a little funny to me that people will complain about reactors when they have Larva, Warpgates, and Chronoboost. That's all.
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.
You can't chop a reactorable unit's construction time in half. A reactor is like having a second production building not a super chronoboost. The result may be the same but the production timing is important in the game.
The cost and tech requirements of the Liberator are also much higher than that of a marauder.
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.
If its attack radius was 15 centered on the unit yes, obviously, but the massive drawback that is the targeting circle means that it has to be able to do massive damage to things that enter it. If units can walk through it with relative impunity the unit is worthless.
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.
As a protoss I don't think that the liberator is OP, but I don't like the unit because it leads to the "colossus effect" all over. Looking at the game, it seems to me that T is strong with liberators in the army and almost dead in the water without. Terrans who are defending the unit in its current form should ask themselves whether they want their bio and mech units to be trash, just because of the overdependence on the very strong liberator unit. Trust me, a month or two after release of the game you will have had you fill of the new and exciting unit and will begin to hate it, because it is the sole reason your other units will be bad in comparison to equivalent units in the P/Z arsenal. Balancing will make sure of that.
How did this unit escape the nerf bat in the patch? Committing to having Ravagers just roaming around your base is a dumb response, Liberator on 1st and 3rd drone line utterly shuts down mining and sets up Terran to push on a whim as you have to frantically react to the Liberator or your drone lines just get smoked.
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.
On September 07 2015 05:42 Cyro wrote: It varies so much with the styles and maps that you can't even make a statement like that i think (T or P spending way more on production/research than the other)
Come on, Cyro. I'm not being hyperbolic here. I was responding to what I consider to be irrational Reactor-hate. So I stated, that, "[reactor] helps offset the fact that Terran production is more expensive than Zerg or Protoss production". It's just a little funny to me that people will complain about reactors when they have Larva, Warpgates, and Chronoboost. That's all.
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.
You can't chop a reactorable unit's construction time in half. A reactor is like having a second production building not a super chronoboost. The result may be the same but the production timing is important in the game.
The cost and tech requirements of the Liberator are also much higher than that of a marauder.
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.
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.
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.
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.
If there's a significant imbalance, it'll get fixed
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.
On September 07 2015 05:42 Cyro wrote: It varies so much with the styles and maps that you can't even make a statement like that i think (T or P spending way more on production/research than the other)
Come on, Cyro. I'm not being hyperbolic here. I was responding to what I consider to be irrational Reactor-hate. So I stated, that, "[reactor] helps offset the fact that Terran production is more expensive than Zerg or Protoss production". It's just a little funny to me that people will complain about reactors when they have Larva, Warpgates, and Chronoboost. That's all.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Minimal splitting and micro in a pure liberator vs corruptor situationmakes for extremely cost effective engagements.
On September 07 2015 05:42 Cyro wrote: It varies so much with the styles and maps that you can't even make a statement like that i think (T or P spending way more on production/research than the other)
Come on, Cyro. I'm not being hyperbolic here. I was responding to what I consider to be irrational Reactor-hate. So I stated, that, "[reactor] helps offset the fact that Terran production is more expensive than Zerg or Protoss production". It's just a little funny to me that people will complain about reactors when they have Larva, Warpgates, and Chronoboost. That's all.
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.
Corrupter have a 2 second build time when the build 20 at once .
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.
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.
Corruptor is actually strong against liberator AoE because they are easy/fast to split and they push eachother away, have huge unit collision compared to small AoE that liberator has.
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.
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.
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?
So how do ppl atm deal with early game liberator harass in maps like dash and terminal? I had 2 spores per mineral line and 3 queens roaming but it wasn't enough.
Should I go 3 spore per mineral line? You can't fit even two for your natural in dash and terminal.
On September 10 2015 03:48 TheWinks wrote: Equivalent cost Thors would do the same thing.
nope
Come on, Big J. That video can't be used as any credible evidence. It would be like unstimmed marines walking into a ball of banelings and then QQ'ing that banelings are wildly broken. If that Protoss waits until the Liberators enter AG mode then that fight looks so much different.
On September 10 2015 03:48 TheWinks wrote: Equivalent cost Thors would do the same thing.
nope
Come on, Big J. That video can't be used as any credible evidence. It would be like unstimmed marines walking into a ball of banelings and then QQ'ing that banelings are wildly broken. If that Protoss waits until the Liberators enter AG mode then that fight looks so much different.
Did I say something like that? I just find his argument stupid. He is comparing a highly microable air unit with a slow, ground walker. I don't think you can make 5 Thors stack like that and jump on top of an opponent who is making a movement mistake like that.
If his point is that in theory other units have that damage output then I don't see the point of his argument. Of course. 27widow mines are the same cost as those liberators and massively outperform those liberators in that situation. That doesn't make them "do the same thing". Or be a viable strategy.
I don't think the video shows something broken. It just highlights once again how stupid starcraft air stacking is. In this scenario the "too strong" (stacking liberators for insane damage density) and "too volatile" side (having half of your army one-shot due to stacking) at once.
The terran is being attacked into, the Thors have longer range which would make up for the fact that slightly less stacked phoenixes would take more shots, and Thors have been built by pro terrans against mass phoenix builds at points in HotS.
The Thors would have popped the phoenixes in much the same manner. Liberators and Thors share the same function against light air. The Thor is being intentionally deemphasized by the liberator in design. I'm not sure why you're trying to use this to call it imba.
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.
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.
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?
Yeah, it's normal to assume Zerg will produce defensive units to shut down their harrass, but the main crux of the voices of posters on this thread are saying that the harrass comes too early, and it's just too powerful that cannot be shut down with spores / queens. When Mutas come, even AA on Liberators is devastating with splash.
Terran doesn't have to rush tanks or rush starport just to defend from special harass from Zerg. Terran can go 4M and counter anything Zerg does.
The bottom line is that Liberators come too early, and they are too powerful for their costs (1 shot hydras? was the Blizz balance team drunk when they made this?), to the point where Z cannot effectively deal with it when their only viable anti-air fighting unit gets sniped before it gets into firing range.
The idea around liberator is meh. Giving to terran an anti-mutas is already huge, as Medivac are so strong that they force mutas for Zerg as the only way to defend drops. But liberator are also a siege unit, aswell a very early harass unit vs a race with a late AA.
The only real counter as Zerg is ravager which 3 shots them : but the unsiege time is fast enough to allow Terran to dodge some shots, so it creates a stupid hit or dodge interaction that has nothing to do in a RTS.
my opinion of moving liberators to fusion core tech still stands, because even if you give liberators a ATG upgrade on tech lab, it can still come way too fast for zerg to have any reasonable counter to it (liberator production time + movement to zerg's base and the upgrade is essentially done anyway), especially when you can't hit them with either spores or queens on certain maps and lock down your economy altogether.
On September 10 2015 08:47 EonuS wrote: my opinion of moving liberators to fusion core tech still stands, because even if you give liberators a ATG upgrade on tech lab, it can still come way too fast for zerg to have any reasonable counter to it (liberator production time + movement to zerg's base and the upgrade is essentially done anyway), especially when you can't hit them with either spores or queens on certain maps and lock down your economy altogether.
I'm not terribly opposed to the Fusion Core requirement either, as long as it's not Fusion Core and tech lab. But this would slow the Liberator rush by about 50 seconds (best case). More likely around 60 seconds. That seems like a fairly severe nerf, especially when the play can be dealt with currently, it can just be overly difficult if you're caught off guard.
And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
On September 10 2015 03:48 TheWinks wrote: Equivalent cost Thors would do the same thing.
nope
Come on, Big J. That video can't be used as any credible evidence. It would be like unstimmed marines walking into a ball of banelings and then QQ'ing that banelings are wildly broken. If that Protoss waits until the Liberators enter AG mode then that fight looks so much different.
Did I say something like that? I just find his argument stupid. He is comparing a highly microable air unit with a slow, ground walker. I don't think you can make 5 Thors stack like that and jump on top of an opponent who is making a movement mistake like that.
If his point is that in theory other units have that damage output then I don't see the point of his argument. Of course. 27widow mines are the same cost as those liberators and massively outperform those liberators in that situation. That doesn't make them "do the same thing". Or be a viable strategy.
I don't think the video shows something broken. It just highlights once again how stupid starcraft air stacking is. In this scenario the "too strong" (stacking liberators for insane damage density) and "too volatile" side (having half of your army one-shot due to stacking) at once.
Gotcha. Misunderstood. I also dislike the air stacking. I guess it's meant to simulate the vertical plane, but it's just bad.
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.
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.
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?
Yeah, it's normal to assume Zerg will produce defensive units to shut down their harrass, but the main crux of the voices of posters on this thread are saying that the harrass comes too early, and it's just too powerful that cannot be shut down with spores / queens. When Mutas come, even AA on Liberators is devastating with splash.
Terran doesn't have to rush tanks or rush starport just to defend from special harass from Zerg. Terran can go 4M and counter anything Zerg does.
The bottom line is that Liberators come too early, and they are too powerful for their costs (1 shot hydras? was the Blizz balance team drunk when they made this?), to the point where Z cannot effectively deal with it when their only viable anti-air fighting unit gets sniped before it gets into firing range.
Well, I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high tech Starport unit ; ) But moving on from that ... Mutas easily beat liberators in small numbers with magic box. So if you rush mutas versus a liberator rush you'll be fine to push away the liberators.
Zerg doesn't have the same type of early harass units for a pretty fairly obvious reason: larva. Imagine producing an early banshee, or Adepts, or void rays with larva? Lulz. It's a legitimate complaint that Zerg's early harass isn't really as strong, but the tradeoff is that Zerg has the strongest economic openers. Then Mutas are probably one of the best harass / map control / tech switch game winners in the game.
Blizzard agrees that the Liberator comes too early, and they're nerfing it. If it's too powerful, they will nerf the damage. It's a single-target DPS unit with a relatively small effective attack area (AG mode). For the cost, I don't think it's too powerful, from a DPS perspective.
It would help if zerg wasn't ONLY nerfed in lotv and received buffs like other races. It's impossible to scout/defend everything meanwhile not having strategies to threaten opponent. Mainly TvZ where it's like old ZvP days again where you have to know all toss builds and how to scout them. (At least in ZvP it is possible to scout every game unlike in TvZ where terran can deny scouting if he wishes)
Liberator is also dumb because there is only one unit that can go toe to toe with it and it's fucing useless against everything else. Muta ling bling is totally obsolete too if you mix liberators with your bio. Forces you to try lurker based strats etc but liberators just own your hydras etc. This is just promotes "3-4base" imba infestor broodlord army deathball style.
Well, I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high tech Starport unit ; ) But moving on from that ... Mutas easily beat liberators in small numbers with magic box. So if you rush mutas versus a liberator rush you'll be fine to push away the liberators.
It's almost like having to open mutas against phoenixes.
If you opt to make spores against liberator you will lose against other builds like tank drop harass or bio timings.
Thing about DPS is that it beats every unit u have on ground and is strong against muta when it's not alone.
On September 10 2015 09:17 TimeSpiral wrote: And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
You need to realize that with the current macro mechanic changes, terran has received a huge boost to their economy thanks to mules AND supply drops, which means they will be at least even on economy with zerg for a while. Going lair very early just so you can deal with liberators is a huge commitment of resources that could have been drones at the 3rd base and even if you do go, you are most likely not gonna achieve anything because liberators will hit your mineral line and prevent you from mining, while terran safely takes his 3rd. Even ravagers with range upgrade come too late and by the time you throw those shots off, you're most likely gonna lose much more resources than him (mining time + lost ravagers). What's worse is that on some positions (orbital shipyard bottom spawn as zerg) they can LOCK DOWN your production because liberators can shoot down on larvae/eggs and when you can't make any units, the game is just over because you will die from terran's next push.
On September 10 2015 08:47 EonuS wrote: my opinion of moving liberators to fusion core tech still stands, because even if you give liberators a ATG upgrade on tech lab, it can still come way too fast for zerg to have any reasonable counter to it (liberator production time + movement to zerg's base and the upgrade is essentially done anyway), especially when you can't hit them with either spores or queens on certain maps and lock down your economy altogether.
I'm not terribly opposed to the Fusion Core requirement either, as long as it's not Fusion Core and tech lab. But this would slow the Liberator rush by about 50 seconds (best case). More likely around 60 seconds. That seems like a fairly severe nerf, especially when the play can be dealt with currently, it can just be overly difficult if you're caught off guard.
And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
On September 10 2015 03:48 TheWinks wrote: Equivalent cost Thors would do the same thing.
nope
Come on, Big J. That video can't be used as any credible evidence. It would be like unstimmed marines walking into a ball of banelings and then QQ'ing that banelings are wildly broken. If that Protoss waits until the Liberators enter AG mode then that fight looks so much different.
Did I say something like that? I just find his argument stupid. He is comparing a highly microable air unit with a slow, ground walker. I don't think you can make 5 Thors stack like that and jump on top of an opponent who is making a movement mistake like that.
If his point is that in theory other units have that damage output then I don't see the point of his argument. Of course. 27widow mines are the same cost as those liberators and massively outperform those liberators in that situation. That doesn't make them "do the same thing". Or be a viable strategy.
I don't think the video shows something broken. It just highlights once again how stupid starcraft air stacking is. In this scenario the "too strong" (stacking liberators for insane damage density) and "too volatile" side (having half of your army one-shot due to stacking) at once.
Gotcha. Misunderstood. I also dislike the air stacking. I guess it's meant to simulate the vertical plane, but it's just bad.
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.
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.
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?
Yeah, it's normal to assume Zerg will produce defensive units to shut down their harrass, but the main crux of the voices of posters on this thread are saying that the harrass comes too early, and it's just too powerful that cannot be shut down with spores / queens. When Mutas come, even AA on Liberators is devastating with splash.
Terran doesn't have to rush tanks or rush starport just to defend from special harass from Zerg. Terran can go 4M and counter anything Zerg does.
The bottom line is that Liberators come too early, and they are too powerful for their costs (1 shot hydras? was the Blizz balance team drunk when they made this?), to the point where Z cannot effectively deal with it when their only viable anti-air fighting unit gets sniped before it gets into firing range.
Well, I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high tech Starport unit ; ) But moving on from that ... Mutas easily beat liberators in small numbers with magic box. So if you rush mutas versus a liberator rush you'll be fine to push away the liberators.
Zerg doesn't have the same type of early harass units for a pretty fairly obvious reason: larva. Imagine producing an early banshee, or Adepts, or void rays with larva? Lulz. It's a legitimate complaint that Zerg's early harass isn't really as strong, but the tradeoff is that Zerg has the strongest economic openers. Then Mutas are probably one of the best harass / map control / tech switch game winners in the game.
Blizzard agrees that the Liberator comes too early, and they're nerfing it. If it's too powerful, they will nerf the damage. It's a single-target DPS unit with a relatively small effective attack area (AG mode). For the cost, I don't think it's too powerful, from a DPS perspective.
Man this has to be the most bias post yet. Ofcourse Zerg should be able to counter liberators on hatch tech, there is no way zerg can tech up in time to deal with it in time without sacrificing a lot of eco. Also you saying earlier that the timing window is already so small to do damage with them, yeah because it's totally fair they can just completely deny a whole mineral line from mining and zerg has to invest in 3 ravagers(300 gas) to just chase them away.
Anyway I thinkchanging the timing of the ground attack mode will help a ton. But I still think this unit will be too good, like it does everything a banshee, thor and siege tank does, but better. I really haven't seen a single banshee yet since this unit got introduced and thors are really rare aswell now. I just don't see how it's fair that a unit can have so many roles at once without being broken, last time we saw this with the infestor and we all know how that ended.
The terran is being attacked into, the Thors have longer range which would make up for the fact that slightly less stacked phoenixes would take more shots, and Thors have been built by pro terrans against mass phoenix builds at points in HotS.
The Thors would have popped the phoenixes in much the same manner. Liberators and Thors share the same function against light air. The Thor is being intentionally deemphasized by the liberator in design. I'm not sure why you're trying to use this to call it imba.
Because you don't go pheonix to counter the thor? Even in a perfect scenario with the Liberators vs those Pheonix the liberators would still hold their own and take an even fight. The liberator can do everything and do everything well it's also pretty easy to mass up.
On September 10 2015 09:17 TimeSpiral wrote: And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
You need to realize that with the current macro mechanic changes, terran has received a huge boost to their economy thanks to mules AND supply drops, which means they will be at least even on economy with zerg for a while. Going lair very early just so you can deal with liberators is a huge commitment of resources that could have been drones at the 3rd base and even if you do go, you are most likely not gonna achieve anything because liberators will hit your mineral line and prevent you from mining, while terran safely takes his 3rd. Even ravagers with range upgrade come too late and by the time you throw those shots off, you're most likely gonna lose much more resources than him (mining time + lost ravagers). What's worse is that on some positions (orbital shipyard bottom spawn as zerg) they can LOCK DOWN your production because liberators can shoot down on larvae/eggs and when you can't make any units, the game is just over because you will die from terran's next push.
I shudder anytime something starts with "[let me inform you] you need to realize [...]". Ugh! But I get it. I guess it's just colloquial. Terran did not receive a huge boost to their economy, unless you're talking about the one week where we did not have MULEs and couldn't win anything other than TvTs. Supply dropping is completely stupid now with scans costing 100 energy. And are you saying Terrans are rushing Liberators and taking a quick 3rd while the first one is preventing some mining on one of your three hatches? Just build units and go kill the Terran.
I guess let me ask this question, because maybe I'm confused: should a Terran who invests in a high-tech rush play be able to cause some damage if the Zerg is unprepared, or caught of guard? It almost feels like the argument is "I should be able to defend easily with my fast three-hatch drone only openers." So please, inform me what an acceptable scenario looks like to you.
On September 10 2015 08:47 EonuS wrote: my opinion of moving liberators to fusion core tech still stands, because even if you give liberators a ATG upgrade on tech lab, it can still come way too fast for zerg to have any reasonable counter to it (liberator production time + movement to zerg's base and the upgrade is essentially done anyway), especially when you can't hit them with either spores or queens on certain maps and lock down your economy altogether.
I'm not terribly opposed to the Fusion Core requirement either, as long as it's not Fusion Core and tech lab. But this would slow the Liberator rush by about 50 seconds (best case). More likely around 60 seconds. That seems like a fairly severe nerf, especially when the play can be dealt with currently, it can just be overly difficult if you're caught off guard.
And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
On September 10 2015 04:15 Big J wrote:
On September 10 2015 04:05 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 10 2015 03:52 Big J wrote:
On September 10 2015 03:48 TheWinks wrote: Equivalent cost Thors would do the same thing.
nope
Come on, Big J. That video can't be used as any credible evidence. It would be like unstimmed marines walking into a ball of banelings and then QQ'ing that banelings are wildly broken. If that Protoss waits until the Liberators enter AG mode then that fight looks so much different.
Did I say something like that? I just find his argument stupid. He is comparing a highly microable air unit with a slow, ground walker. I don't think you can make 5 Thors stack like that and jump on top of an opponent who is making a movement mistake like that.
If his point is that in theory other units have that damage output then I don't see the point of his argument. Of course. 27widow mines are the same cost as those liberators and massively outperform those liberators in that situation. That doesn't make them "do the same thing". Or be a viable strategy.
I don't think the video shows something broken. It just highlights once again how stupid starcraft air stacking is. In this scenario the "too strong" (stacking liberators for insane damage density) and "too volatile" side (having half of your army one-shot due to stacking) at once.
Gotcha. Misunderstood. I also dislike the air stacking. I guess it's meant to simulate the vertical plane, but it's just bad.
On September 10 2015 04:30 parkufarku wrote:
On September 09 2015 23:14 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 09 2015 10:41 parkufarku wrote:
On September 09 2015 08:11 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 09 2015 07:03 zelderan wrote:
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.
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.
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?
Yeah, it's normal to assume Zerg will produce defensive units to shut down their harrass, but the main crux of the voices of posters on this thread are saying that the harrass comes too early, and it's just too powerful that cannot be shut down with spores / queens. When Mutas come, even AA on Liberators is devastating with splash.
Terran doesn't have to rush tanks or rush starport just to defend from special harass from Zerg. Terran can go 4M and counter anything Zerg does.
The bottom line is that Liberators come too early, and they are too powerful for their costs (1 shot hydras? was the Blizz balance team drunk when they made this?), to the point where Z cannot effectively deal with it when their only viable anti-air fighting unit gets sniped before it gets into firing range.
Well, I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high tech Starport unit ; ) But moving on from that ... Mutas easily beat liberators in small numbers with magic box. So if you rush mutas versus a liberator rush you'll be fine to push away the liberators.
Zerg doesn't have the same type of early harass units for a pretty fairly obvious reason: larva. Imagine producing an early banshee, or Adepts, or void rays with larva? Lulz. It's a legitimate complaint that Zerg's early harass isn't really as strong, but the tradeoff is that Zerg has the strongest economic openers. Then Mutas are probably one of the best harass / map control / tech switch game winners in the game.
Blizzard agrees that the Liberator comes too early, and they're nerfing it. If it's too powerful, they will nerf the damage. It's a single-target DPS unit with a relatively small effective attack area (AG mode). For the cost, I don't think it's too powerful, from a DPS perspective.
Man this has to be the most bias post yet. Ofcourse Zerg should be able to counter liberators on hatch tech, there is no way zerg can tech up in time to deal with it in time without sacrificing a lot of eco. Also you saying earlier that the timing window is already so small to do damage with them, yeah because it's totally fair they can just completely deny a whole mineral line from mining and zerg has to invest in 3 ravagers(300 gas) to just chase them away.
Anyway I thinkchanging the timing of the ground attack mode will help a ton. But I still think this unit will be too good, like it does everything a banshee, thor and siege tank does, but better. I really haven't seen a single banshee yet since this unit got introduced and thors are really rare aswell now. I just don't see how it's fair that a unit can have so many roles at once without being broken, last time we saw this with the infestor and we all know how that ended.
Well, I'm definitely speaking from a Terran perspective. So, I guess that's a bias. Sure. But the way you said it seemed like you were implying that my bias was unfairly skewing my observations. I'm fine with being wrong. We're all just discussing the game we love here. So, please, if I made an unfair comment, or am just wrong about something, please point it out. I felt like my comments (at least the one you quoted) were fair.
RE: hatch tech To be fair, I said " I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high-tech Starport unit ". I stand behind that statement. But you might be talking about when I said, "And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals". Which I will submit is poorly worded. That bit about minerals was me saying, "you should have to spend some gas to defend this." And the other play I was referring to is the cloaked banshee rush.
RE: Ravagers Now, when you say "can just completely deny a whole mineral line from mining", that's not really fair either. If the Terran is greedy, and tries to get the whole mineral line, you should be able to attack the Liberator without taking damage. In some instances, where there are "dead air spots", I think the Liberator can only barely cover a couple of patches on one base, and sometimes it's the third. So if you're calling me out for unfair bias, I might have to point out that I think this is at least a mischaracterization of the issue. No?
You say, "zerg has to invest in 3 ravagers(300 gas) to just chase them away". I would add that three ravagers can kill a Liberator if they launch bile while it's in AG mode. And, isn't chasing them away or killing them a successful defense? I guess I don't see the issue here. Terran has to open gas first, into double gas, into factory (100 gas) -> Starport (100 gas) -> Armory (100 gas) before they can even enter AG mode, while building the first Liberator (150 gas). So you can defend my 450 gas tech-rush play with 300 gas. What's the issue? You're in the green a full 150 gas, and you're probably significantly more in the green on minerals.
RE: The unit is too good The unit fills a critical role for Terran in Legacy, especially because of the extremely deadly new units added to both the Zerg and Protoss arsenal. It doesn't fill the role of a tank, because the tank has a radial range. It's definitely not a Thor, because the Liberator is a glass cannon, and is fast, and it's not a banshee, because it can't cloak and is immobile while attacking.
Please correct me, or push back, on what I got wrong here.
On September 10 2015 09:17 TimeSpiral wrote: And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
You need to realize that with the current macro mechanic changes, terran has received a huge boost to their economy thanks to mules AND supply drops, which means they will be at least even on economy with zerg for a while. Going lair very early just so you can deal with liberators is a huge commitment of resources that could have been drones at the 3rd base and even if you do go, you are most likely not gonna achieve anything because liberators will hit your mineral line and prevent you from mining, while terran safely takes his 3rd. Even ravagers with range upgrade come too late and by the time you throw those shots off, you're most likely gonna lose much more resources than him (mining time + lost ravagers). What's worse is that on some positions (orbital shipyard bottom spawn as zerg) they can LOCK DOWN your production because liberators can shoot down on larvae/eggs and when you can't make any units, the game is just over because you will die from terran's next push.
I shudder anytime something starts with "[let me inform you] you need to realize [...]". Ugh! But I get it. I guess it's just colloquial. Terran did not receive a huge boost to their economy, unless you're talking about the one week where we did not have MULEs and couldn't win anything other than TvTs. Supply dropping is completely stupid now with scans costing 100 energy. And are you saying Terrans are rushing Liberators and taking a quick 3rd while the first one is preventing some mining on one of your three hatches? Just build units and go kill the Terran.
I guess let me ask this question, because maybe I'm confused: should a Terran who invests in a high-tech rush play be able to cause some damage if the Zerg is unprepared, or caught of guard? It almost feels like the argument is "I should be able to defend easily with my fast three-hatch drone only openers." So please, inform me what an acceptable scenario looks like to you.
On September 10 2015 08:47 EonuS wrote: my opinion of moving liberators to fusion core tech still stands, because even if you give liberators a ATG upgrade on tech lab, it can still come way too fast for zerg to have any reasonable counter to it (liberator production time + movement to zerg's base and the upgrade is essentially done anyway), especially when you can't hit them with either spores or queens on certain maps and lock down your economy altogether.
I'm not terribly opposed to the Fusion Core requirement either, as long as it's not Fusion Core and tech lab. But this would slow the Liberator rush by about 50 seconds (best case). More likely around 60 seconds. That seems like a fairly severe nerf, especially when the play can be dealt with currently, it can just be overly difficult if you're caught off guard.
And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
On September 10 2015 04:15 Big J wrote:
On September 10 2015 04:05 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 10 2015 03:52 Big J wrote:
On September 10 2015 03:48 TheWinks wrote: Equivalent cost Thors would do the same thing.
nope
Come on, Big J. That video can't be used as any credible evidence. It would be like unstimmed marines walking into a ball of banelings and then QQ'ing that banelings are wildly broken. If that Protoss waits until the Liberators enter AG mode then that fight looks so much different.
Did I say something like that? I just find his argument stupid. He is comparing a highly microable air unit with a slow, ground walker. I don't think you can make 5 Thors stack like that and jump on top of an opponent who is making a movement mistake like that.
If his point is that in theory other units have that damage output then I don't see the point of his argument. Of course. 27widow mines are the same cost as those liberators and massively outperform those liberators in that situation. That doesn't make them "do the same thing". Or be a viable strategy.
I don't think the video shows something broken. It just highlights once again how stupid starcraft air stacking is. In this scenario the "too strong" (stacking liberators for insane damage density) and "too volatile" side (having half of your army one-shot due to stacking) at once.
Gotcha. Misunderstood. I also dislike the air stacking. I guess it's meant to simulate the vertical plane, but it's just bad.
On September 10 2015 04:30 parkufarku wrote:
On September 09 2015 23:14 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 09 2015 10:41 parkufarku wrote:
On September 09 2015 08:11 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 09 2015 07:03 zelderan wrote:
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.
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.
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?
Yeah, it's normal to assume Zerg will produce defensive units to shut down their harrass, but the main crux of the voices of posters on this thread are saying that the harrass comes too early, and it's just too powerful that cannot be shut down with spores / queens. When Mutas come, even AA on Liberators is devastating with splash.
Terran doesn't have to rush tanks or rush starport just to defend from special harass from Zerg. Terran can go 4M and counter anything Zerg does.
The bottom line is that Liberators come too early, and they are too powerful for their costs (1 shot hydras? was the Blizz balance team drunk when they made this?), to the point where Z cannot effectively deal with it when their only viable anti-air fighting unit gets sniped before it gets into firing range.
Well, I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high tech Starport unit ; ) But moving on from that ... Mutas easily beat liberators in small numbers with magic box. So if you rush mutas versus a liberator rush you'll be fine to push away the liberators.
Zerg doesn't have the same type of early harass units for a pretty fairly obvious reason: larva. Imagine producing an early banshee, or Adepts, or void rays with larva? Lulz. It's a legitimate complaint that Zerg's early harass isn't really as strong, but the tradeoff is that Zerg has the strongest economic openers. Then Mutas are probably one of the best harass / map control / tech switch game winners in the game.
Blizzard agrees that the Liberator comes too early, and they're nerfing it. If it's too powerful, they will nerf the damage. It's a single-target DPS unit with a relatively small effective attack area (AG mode). For the cost, I don't think it's too powerful, from a DPS perspective.
Man this has to be the most bias post yet. Ofcourse Zerg should be able to counter liberators on hatch tech, there is no way zerg can tech up in time to deal with it in time without sacrificing a lot of eco. Also you saying earlier that the timing window is already so small to do damage with them, yeah because it's totally fair they can just completely deny a whole mineral line from mining and zerg has to invest in 3 ravagers(300 gas) to just chase them away.
Anyway I thinkchanging the timing of the ground attack mode will help a ton. But I still think this unit will be too good, like it does everything a banshee, thor and siege tank does, but better. I really haven't seen a single banshee yet since this unit got introduced and thors are really rare aswell now. I just don't see how it's fair that a unit can have so many roles at once without being broken, last time we saw this with the infestor and we all know how that ended.
Well, I'm definitely speaking from a Terran perspective. So, I guess that's a bias. Sure. But the way you said it seemed like you were implying that my bias was unfairly skewing my observations. I'm fine with being wrong. We're all just discussing the game we love here. So, please, if I made an unfair comment, or am just wrong about something, please point it out. I felt like my comments (at least the one you quoted) were fair.
RE: hatch tech To be fair, I said " I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high-tech Starport unit ". I stand behind that statement. But you might be talking about when I said, "And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals". Which I will submit is poorly worded. That bit about minerals was me saying, "you should have to spend some gas to defend this." And the other play I was referring to is the cloaked banshee rush.
RE: Ravagers Now, when you say "can just completely deny a whole mineral line from mining", that's not really fair either. If the Terran is greedy, and tries to get the whole mineral line, you should be able to attack the Liberator without taking damage. In some instances, where there are "dead air spots", I think the Liberator can only barely cover a couple of patches on one base, and sometimes it's the third. So if you're calling me out for unfair bias, I might have to point out that I think this is at least a mischaracterization of the issue. No?
You say, "zerg has to invest in 3 ravagers(300 gas) to just chase them away". I would add that three ravagers can kill a Liberator if they launch bile while it's in AG mode. And, isn't chasing them away or killing them a successful defense? I guess I don't see the issue here. Terran has to open gas first, into double gas, into factory (100 gas) -> Starport (100 gas) -> Armory (100 gas) before they can even enter AG mode, while building the first Liberator (150 gas). So you can defend my 450 gas tech-rush play with 300 gas. What's the issue? You're in the green a full 150 gas, and you're probably significantly more in the green on minerals.
RE: The unit is too good The unit fills a critical role for Terran in Legacy, especially because of the extremely deadly new units added to both the Zerg and Protoss arsenal. It doesn't fill the role of a tank, because the tank has a radial range. It's definitely not a Thor, because the Liberator is a glass cannon, and is fast, and it's not a banshee, because it can't cloak and is immobile while attacking.
Please correct me, or push back, on what I got wrong here.
Go back and check my image spots on moonlight madness whole bases can be covered whilst being in a safe spot, everyone must agree that the ATG limits map making design with it's 15 range.
On September 10 2015 09:17 TimeSpiral wrote: And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
You need to realize that with the current macro mechanic changes, terran has received a huge boost to their economy thanks to mules AND supply drops, which means they will be at least even on economy with zerg for a while. Going lair very early just so you can deal with liberators is a huge commitment of resources that could have been drones at the 3rd base and even if you do go, you are most likely not gonna achieve anything because liberators will hit your mineral line and prevent you from mining, while terran safely takes his 3rd. Even ravagers with range upgrade come too late and by the time you throw those shots off, you're most likely gonna lose much more resources than him (mining time + lost ravagers). What's worse is that on some positions (orbital shipyard bottom spawn as zerg) they can LOCK DOWN your production because liberators can shoot down on larvae/eggs and when you can't make any units, the game is just over because you will die from terran's next push.
I shudder anytime something starts with "[let me inform you] you need to realize [...]". Ugh! But I get it. I guess it's just colloquial. Terran did not receive a huge boost to their economy, unless you're talking about the one week where we did not have MULEs and couldn't win anything other than TvTs. Supply dropping is completely stupid now with scans costing 100 energy. And are you saying Terrans are rushing Liberators and taking a quick 3rd while the first one is preventing some mining on one of your three hatches? Just build units and go kill the Terran.
I guess let me ask this question, because maybe I'm confused: should a Terran who invests in a high-tech rush play be able to cause some damage if the Zerg is unprepared, or caught of guard? It almost feels like the argument is "I should be able to defend easily with my fast three-hatch drone only openers." So please, inform me what an acceptable scenario looks like to you.
On September 10 2015 15:06 mCon.Hephaistas wrote:
On September 10 2015 09:17 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 10 2015 08:47 EonuS wrote: my opinion of moving liberators to fusion core tech still stands, because even if you give liberators a ATG upgrade on tech lab, it can still come way too fast for zerg to have any reasonable counter to it (liberator production time + movement to zerg's base and the upgrade is essentially done anyway), especially when you can't hit them with either spores or queens on certain maps and lock down your economy altogether.
I'm not terribly opposed to the Fusion Core requirement either, as long as it's not Fusion Core and tech lab. But this would slow the Liberator rush by about 50 seconds (best case). More likely around 60 seconds. That seems like a fairly severe nerf, especially when the play can be dealt with currently, it can just be overly difficult if you're caught off guard.
And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
On September 10 2015 04:15 Big J wrote:
On September 10 2015 04:05 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 10 2015 03:52 Big J wrote:
On September 10 2015 03:48 TheWinks wrote: Equivalent cost Thors would do the same thing.
nope
Come on, Big J. That video can't be used as any credible evidence. It would be like unstimmed marines walking into a ball of banelings and then QQ'ing that banelings are wildly broken. If that Protoss waits until the Liberators enter AG mode then that fight looks so much different.
Did I say something like that? I just find his argument stupid. He is comparing a highly microable air unit with a slow, ground walker. I don't think you can make 5 Thors stack like that and jump on top of an opponent who is making a movement mistake like that.
If his point is that in theory other units have that damage output then I don't see the point of his argument. Of course. 27widow mines are the same cost as those liberators and massively outperform those liberators in that situation. That doesn't make them "do the same thing". Or be a viable strategy.
I don't think the video shows something broken. It just highlights once again how stupid starcraft air stacking is. In this scenario the "too strong" (stacking liberators for insane damage density) and "too volatile" side (having half of your army one-shot due to stacking) at once.
Gotcha. Misunderstood. I also dislike the air stacking. I guess it's meant to simulate the vertical plane, but it's just bad.
On September 10 2015 04:30 parkufarku wrote:
On September 09 2015 23:14 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 09 2015 10:41 parkufarku wrote:
On September 09 2015 08:11 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 09 2015 07:03 zelderan wrote:
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.
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.
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?
Yeah, it's normal to assume Zerg will produce defensive units to shut down their harrass, but the main crux of the voices of posters on this thread are saying that the harrass comes too early, and it's just too powerful that cannot be shut down with spores / queens. When Mutas come, even AA on Liberators is devastating with splash.
Terran doesn't have to rush tanks or rush starport just to defend from special harass from Zerg. Terran can go 4M and counter anything Zerg does.
The bottom line is that Liberators come too early, and they are too powerful for their costs (1 shot hydras? was the Blizz balance team drunk when they made this?), to the point where Z cannot effectively deal with it when their only viable anti-air fighting unit gets sniped before it gets into firing range.
Well, I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high tech Starport unit ; ) But moving on from that ... Mutas easily beat liberators in small numbers with magic box. So if you rush mutas versus a liberator rush you'll be fine to push away the liberators.
Zerg doesn't have the same type of early harass units for a pretty fairly obvious reason: larva. Imagine producing an early banshee, or Adepts, or void rays with larva? Lulz. It's a legitimate complaint that Zerg's early harass isn't really as strong, but the tradeoff is that Zerg has the strongest economic openers. Then Mutas are probably one of the best harass / map control / tech switch game winners in the game.
Blizzard agrees that the Liberator comes too early, and they're nerfing it. If it's too powerful, they will nerf the damage. It's a single-target DPS unit with a relatively small effective attack area (AG mode). For the cost, I don't think it's too powerful, from a DPS perspective.
Man this has to be the most bias post yet. Ofcourse Zerg should be able to counter liberators on hatch tech, there is no way zerg can tech up in time to deal with it in time without sacrificing a lot of eco. Also you saying earlier that the timing window is already so small to do damage with them, yeah because it's totally fair they can just completely deny a whole mineral line from mining and zerg has to invest in 3 ravagers(300 gas) to just chase them away.
Anyway I thinkchanging the timing of the ground attack mode will help a ton. But I still think this unit will be too good, like it does everything a banshee, thor and siege tank does, but better. I really haven't seen a single banshee yet since this unit got introduced and thors are really rare aswell now. I just don't see how it's fair that a unit can have so many roles at once without being broken, last time we saw this with the infestor and we all know how that ended.
Well, I'm definitely speaking from a Terran perspective. So, I guess that's a bias. Sure. But the way you said it seemed like you were implying that my bias was unfairly skewing my observations. I'm fine with being wrong. We're all just discussing the game we love here. So, please, if I made an unfair comment, or am just wrong about something, please point it out. I felt like my comments (at least the one you quoted) were fair.
RE: hatch tech To be fair, I said " I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high-tech Starport unit ". I stand behind that statement. But you might be talking about when I said, "And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals". Which I will submit is poorly worded. That bit about minerals was me saying, "you should have to spend some gas to defend this." And the other play I was referring to is the cloaked banshee rush.
RE: Ravagers Now, when you say "can just completely deny a whole mineral line from mining", that's not really fair either. If the Terran is greedy, and tries to get the whole mineral line, you should be able to attack the Liberator without taking damage. In some instances, where there are "dead air spots", I think the Liberator can only barely cover a couple of patches on one base, and sometimes it's the third. So if you're calling me out for unfair bias, I might have to point out that I think this is at least a mischaracterization of the issue. No?
You say, "zerg has to invest in 3 ravagers(300 gas) to just chase them away". I would add that three ravagers can kill a Liberator if they launch bile while it's in AG mode. And, isn't chasing them away or killing them a successful defense? I guess I don't see the issue here. Terran has to open gas first, into double gas, into factory (100 gas) -> Starport (100 gas) -> Armory (100 gas) before they can even enter AG mode, while building the first Liberator (150 gas). So you can defend my 450 gas tech-rush play with 300 gas. What's the issue? You're in the green a full 150 gas, and you're probably significantly more in the green on minerals.
RE: The unit is too good The unit fills a critical role for Terran in Legacy, especially because of the extremely deadly new units added to both the Zerg and Protoss arsenal. It doesn't fill the role of a tank, because the tank has a radial range. It's definitely not a Thor, because the Liberator is a glass cannon, and is fast, and it's not a banshee, because it can't cloak and is immobile while attacking.
Please correct me, or push back, on what I got wrong here.
Go back and check my image spots on moonlight madness whole bases can be covered whilst being in a safe spot, everyone must agree that the ATG limits map making design with it's 15 range.
I remember the post. A lot of work, and potentially useful analysis (if it's accurate). And yeah, spores cannot hit Liberators in certain positions on certain maps. Might need ravagers. Also, I would ask that you produce one or several pro-level matches of Legacy where Zerg builds ravagers and cannot attack a rushed Liberator. The dead space argument is brought up a lot, which would suggest that it's broken, which would suggest that we should be seeing it in virtually every game where Liberators are rushed, right? I've watched a lot of Legacy, and I just don't see this happening.
The terran is being attacked into, the Thors have longer range which would make up for the fact that slightly less stacked phoenixes would take more shots, and Thors have been built by pro terrans against mass phoenix builds at points in HotS.
The Thors would have popped the phoenixes in much the same manner. Liberators and Thors share the same function against light air. The Thor is being intentionally deemphasized by the liberator in design. I'm not sure why you're trying to use this to call it imba.
Because you don't go pheonix to counter the thor?
If you go phoenix to counter liberator, you're rolling the dice that you're going to be able to keep the liberator count really low. If you fail, the phoenix investment becomes a liability.
On September 10 2015 09:17 TimeSpiral wrote: And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
You need to realize that with the current macro mechanic changes, terran has received a huge boost to their economy thanks to mules AND supply drops, which means they will be at least even on economy with zerg for a while. Going lair very early just so you can deal with liberators is a huge commitment of resources that could have been drones at the 3rd base and even if you do go, you are most likely not gonna achieve anything because liberators will hit your mineral line and prevent you from mining, while terran safely takes his 3rd. Even ravagers with range upgrade come too late and by the time you throw those shots off, you're most likely gonna lose much more resources than him (mining time + lost ravagers). What's worse is that on some positions (orbital shipyard bottom spawn as zerg) they can LOCK DOWN your production because liberators can shoot down on larvae/eggs and when you can't make any units, the game is just over because you will die from terran's next push.
I shudder anytime something starts with "[let me inform you] you need to realize [...]". Ugh! But I get it. I guess it's just colloquial. Terran did not receive a huge boost to their economy, unless you're talking about the one week where we did not have MULEs and couldn't win anything other than TvTs. Supply dropping is completely stupid now with scans costing 100 energy. And are you saying Terrans are rushing Liberators and taking a quick 3rd while the first one is preventing some mining on one of your three hatches? Just build units and go kill the Terran.
I guess let me ask this question, because maybe I'm confused: should a Terran who invests in a high-tech rush play be able to cause some damage if the Zerg is unprepared, or caught of guard? It almost feels like the argument is "I should be able to defend easily with my fast three-hatch drone only openers." So please, inform me what an acceptable scenario looks like to you.
On September 10 2015 08:47 EonuS wrote: my opinion of moving liberators to fusion core tech still stands, because even if you give liberators a ATG upgrade on tech lab, it can still come way too fast for zerg to have any reasonable counter to it (liberator production time + movement to zerg's base and the upgrade is essentially done anyway), especially when you can't hit them with either spores or queens on certain maps and lock down your economy altogether.
I'm not terribly opposed to the Fusion Core requirement either, as long as it's not Fusion Core and tech lab. But this would slow the Liberator rush by about 50 seconds (best case). More likely around 60 seconds. That seems like a fairly severe nerf, especially when the play can be dealt with currently, it can just be overly difficult if you're caught off guard.
And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
On September 10 2015 04:15 Big J wrote:
On September 10 2015 04:05 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 10 2015 03:52 Big J wrote:
On September 10 2015 03:48 TheWinks wrote: Equivalent cost Thors would do the same thing.
nope
Come on, Big J. That video can't be used as any credible evidence. It would be like unstimmed marines walking into a ball of banelings and then QQ'ing that banelings are wildly broken. If that Protoss waits until the Liberators enter AG mode then that fight looks so much different.
Did I say something like that? I just find his argument stupid. He is comparing a highly microable air unit with a slow, ground walker. I don't think you can make 5 Thors stack like that and jump on top of an opponent who is making a movement mistake like that.
If his point is that in theory other units have that damage output then I don't see the point of his argument. Of course. 27widow mines are the same cost as those liberators and massively outperform those liberators in that situation. That doesn't make them "do the same thing". Or be a viable strategy.
I don't think the video shows something broken. It just highlights once again how stupid starcraft air stacking is. In this scenario the "too strong" (stacking liberators for insane damage density) and "too volatile" side (having half of your army one-shot due to stacking) at once.
Gotcha. Misunderstood. I also dislike the air stacking. I guess it's meant to simulate the vertical plane, but it's just bad.
On September 10 2015 04:30 parkufarku wrote:
On September 09 2015 23:14 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 09 2015 10:41 parkufarku wrote:
On September 09 2015 08:11 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 09 2015 07:03 zelderan wrote:
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.
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.
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?
Yeah, it's normal to assume Zerg will produce defensive units to shut down their harrass, but the main crux of the voices of posters on this thread are saying that the harrass comes too early, and it's just too powerful that cannot be shut down with spores / queens. When Mutas come, even AA on Liberators is devastating with splash.
Terran doesn't have to rush tanks or rush starport just to defend from special harass from Zerg. Terran can go 4M and counter anything Zerg does.
The bottom line is that Liberators come too early, and they are too powerful for their costs (1 shot hydras? was the Blizz balance team drunk when they made this?), to the point where Z cannot effectively deal with it when their only viable anti-air fighting unit gets sniped before it gets into firing range.
Well, I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high tech Starport unit ; ) But moving on from that ... Mutas easily beat liberators in small numbers with magic box. So if you rush mutas versus a liberator rush you'll be fine to push away the liberators.
Zerg doesn't have the same type of early harass units for a pretty fairly obvious reason: larva. Imagine producing an early banshee, or Adepts, or void rays with larva? Lulz. It's a legitimate complaint that Zerg's early harass isn't really as strong, but the tradeoff is that Zerg has the strongest economic openers. Then Mutas are probably one of the best harass / map control / tech switch game winners in the game.
Blizzard agrees that the Liberator comes too early, and they're nerfing it. If it's too powerful, they will nerf the damage. It's a single-target DPS unit with a relatively small effective attack area (AG mode). For the cost, I don't think it's too powerful, from a DPS perspective.
Man this has to be the most bias post yet. Ofcourse Zerg should be able to counter liberators on hatch tech, there is no way zerg can tech up in time to deal with it in time without sacrificing a lot of eco. Also you saying earlier that the timing window is already so small to do damage with them, yeah because it's totally fair they can just completely deny a whole mineral line from mining and zerg has to invest in 3 ravagers(300 gas) to just chase them away.
Anyway I thinkchanging the timing of the ground attack mode will help a ton. But I still think this unit will be too good, like it does everything a banshee, thor and siege tank does, but better. I really haven't seen a single banshee yet since this unit got introduced and thors are really rare aswell now. I just don't see how it's fair that a unit can have so many roles at once without being broken, last time we saw this with the infestor and we all know how that ended.
Well, I'm definitely speaking from a Terran perspective. So, I guess that's a bias. Sure. But the way you said it seemed like you were implying that my bias was unfairly skewing my observations. I'm fine with being wrong. We're all just discussing the game we love here. So, please, if I made an unfair comment, or am just wrong about something, please point it out. I felt like my comments (at least the one you quoted) were fair.
RE: hatch tech To be fair, I said " I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high-tech Starport unit ". I stand behind that statement. But you might be talking about when I said, "And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals". Which I will submit is poorly worded. That bit about minerals was me saying, "you should have to spend some gas to defend this." And the other play I was referring to is the cloaked banshee rush.
RE: Ravagers Now, when you say "can just completely deny a whole mineral line from mining", that's not really fair either. If the Terran is greedy, and tries to get the whole mineral line, you should be able to attack the Liberator without taking damage. In some instances, where there are "dead air spots", I think the Liberator can only barely cover a couple of patches on one base, and sometimes it's the third. So if you're calling me out for unfair bias, I might have to point out that I think this is at least a mischaracterization of the issue. No?
You say, "zerg has to invest in 3 ravagers(300 gas) to just chase them away". I would add that three ravagers can kill a Liberator if they launch bile while it's in AG mode. And, isn't chasing them away or killing them a successful defense? I guess I don't see the issue here. Terran has to open gas first, into double gas, into factory (100 gas) -> Starport (100 gas) -> Armory (100 gas) before they can even enter AG mode, while building the first Liberator (150 gas). So you can defend my 450 gas tech-rush play with 300 gas. What's the issue? You're in the green a full 150 gas, and you're probably significantly more in the green on minerals.
RE: The unit is too good The unit fills a critical role for Terran in Legacy, especially because of the extremely deadly new units added to both the Zerg and Protoss arsenal. It doesn't fill the role of a tank, because the tank has a radial range. It's definitely not a Thor, because the Liberator is a glass cannon, and is fast, and it's not a banshee, because it can't cloak and is immobile while attacking.
Please correct me, or push back, on what I got wrong here.
Few patches yeah uh no.. The advantage of other races is that they can tech so heavily early game compared to Zerg, and zerg can't just mine as much gas as the other races do without hurting their own economy heavily. The problem is like early hots hellbat drops, you can probably defend it, but even if you do it perfectly you will still be behind.
And yes it does make thors and banshees completely obsolete, it's better at harras then a banshee by far, is a lot faster then thors and can be reactored. I do agree tanks are still very useful due to their splash, but liberators can zone out armies almost just as well. But keep being bias, that's fine, just don't be suprised when the nerf hammer is gonna hit this unit hard.
On September 10 2015 09:17 TimeSpiral wrote: And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
You need to realize that with the current macro mechanic changes, terran has received a huge boost to their economy thanks to mules AND supply drops, which means they will be at least even on economy with zerg for a while. Going lair very early just so you can deal with liberators is a huge commitment of resources that could have been drones at the 3rd base and even if you do go, you are most likely not gonna achieve anything because liberators will hit your mineral line and prevent you from mining, while terran safely takes his 3rd. Even ravagers with range upgrade come too late and by the time you throw those shots off, you're most likely gonna lose much more resources than him (mining time + lost ravagers). What's worse is that on some positions (orbital shipyard bottom spawn as zerg) they can LOCK DOWN your production because liberators can shoot down on larvae/eggs and when you can't make any units, the game is just over because you will die from terran's next push.
I shudder anytime something starts with "[let me inform you] you need to realize [...]". Ugh! But I get it. I guess it's just colloquial. Terran did not receive a huge boost to their economy, unless you're talking about the one week where we did not have MULEs and couldn't win anything other than TvTs. Supply dropping is completely stupid now with scans costing 100 energy. And are you saying Terrans are rushing Liberators and taking a quick 3rd while the first one is preventing some mining on one of your three hatches? Just build units and go kill the Terran.
I guess let me ask this question, because maybe I'm confused: should a Terran who invests in a high-tech rush play be able to cause some damage if the Zerg is unprepared, or caught of guard? It almost feels like the argument is "I should be able to defend easily with my fast three-hatch drone only openers." So please, inform me what an acceptable scenario looks like to you.
On September 10 2015 15:06 mCon.Hephaistas wrote:
On September 10 2015 09:17 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 10 2015 08:47 EonuS wrote: my opinion of moving liberators to fusion core tech still stands, because even if you give liberators a ATG upgrade on tech lab, it can still come way too fast for zerg to have any reasonable counter to it (liberator production time + movement to zerg's base and the upgrade is essentially done anyway), especially when you can't hit them with either spores or queens on certain maps and lock down your economy altogether.
I'm not terribly opposed to the Fusion Core requirement either, as long as it's not Fusion Core and tech lab. But this would slow the Liberator rush by about 50 seconds (best case). More likely around 60 seconds. That seems like a fairly severe nerf, especially when the play can be dealt with currently, it can just be overly difficult if you're caught off guard.
And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
On September 10 2015 04:15 Big J wrote:
On September 10 2015 04:05 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 10 2015 03:52 Big J wrote:
On September 10 2015 03:48 TheWinks wrote: Equivalent cost Thors would do the same thing.
nope
Come on, Big J. That video can't be used as any credible evidence. It would be like unstimmed marines walking into a ball of banelings and then QQ'ing that banelings are wildly broken. If that Protoss waits until the Liberators enter AG mode then that fight looks so much different.
Did I say something like that? I just find his argument stupid. He is comparing a highly microable air unit with a slow, ground walker. I don't think you can make 5 Thors stack like that and jump on top of an opponent who is making a movement mistake like that.
If his point is that in theory other units have that damage output then I don't see the point of his argument. Of course. 27widow mines are the same cost as those liberators and massively outperform those liberators in that situation. That doesn't make them "do the same thing". Or be a viable strategy.
I don't think the video shows something broken. It just highlights once again how stupid starcraft air stacking is. In this scenario the "too strong" (stacking liberators for insane damage density) and "too volatile" side (having half of your army one-shot due to stacking) at once.
Gotcha. Misunderstood. I also dislike the air stacking. I guess it's meant to simulate the vertical plane, but it's just bad.
On September 10 2015 04:30 parkufarku wrote:
On September 09 2015 23:14 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 09 2015 10:41 parkufarku wrote:
On September 09 2015 08:11 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 09 2015 07:03 zelderan wrote:
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.
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.
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?
Yeah, it's normal to assume Zerg will produce defensive units to shut down their harrass, but the main crux of the voices of posters on this thread are saying that the harrass comes too early, and it's just too powerful that cannot be shut down with spores / queens. When Mutas come, even AA on Liberators is devastating with splash.
Terran doesn't have to rush tanks or rush starport just to defend from special harass from Zerg. Terran can go 4M and counter anything Zerg does.
The bottom line is that Liberators come too early, and they are too powerful for their costs (1 shot hydras? was the Blizz balance team drunk when they made this?), to the point where Z cannot effectively deal with it when their only viable anti-air fighting unit gets sniped before it gets into firing range.
Well, I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high tech Starport unit ; ) But moving on from that ... Mutas easily beat liberators in small numbers with magic box. So if you rush mutas versus a liberator rush you'll be fine to push away the liberators.
Zerg doesn't have the same type of early harass units for a pretty fairly obvious reason: larva. Imagine producing an early banshee, or Adepts, or void rays with larva? Lulz. It's a legitimate complaint that Zerg's early harass isn't really as strong, but the tradeoff is that Zerg has the strongest economic openers. Then Mutas are probably one of the best harass / map control / tech switch game winners in the game.
Blizzard agrees that the Liberator comes too early, and they're nerfing it. If it's too powerful, they will nerf the damage. It's a single-target DPS unit with a relatively small effective attack area (AG mode). For the cost, I don't think it's too powerful, from a DPS perspective.
Man this has to be the most bias post yet. Ofcourse Zerg should be able to counter liberators on hatch tech, there is no way zerg can tech up in time to deal with it in time without sacrificing a lot of eco. Also you saying earlier that the timing window is already so small to do damage with them, yeah because it's totally fair they can just completely deny a whole mineral line from mining and zerg has to invest in 3 ravagers(300 gas) to just chase them away.
Anyway I thinkchanging the timing of the ground attack mode will help a ton. But I still think this unit will be too good, like it does everything a banshee, thor and siege tank does, but better. I really haven't seen a single banshee yet since this unit got introduced and thors are really rare aswell now. I just don't see how it's fair that a unit can have so many roles at once without being broken, last time we saw this with the infestor and we all know how that ended.
Well, I'm definitely speaking from a Terran perspective. So, I guess that's a bias. Sure. But the way you said it seemed like you were implying that my bias was unfairly skewing my observations. I'm fine with being wrong. We're all just discussing the game we love here. So, please, if I made an unfair comment, or am just wrong about something, please point it out. I felt like my comments (at least the one you quoted) were fair.
RE: hatch tech To be fair, I said " I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high-tech Starport unit ". I stand behind that statement. But you might be talking about when I said, "And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals". Which I will submit is poorly worded. That bit about minerals was me saying, "you should have to spend some gas to defend this." And the other play I was referring to is the cloaked banshee rush.
RE: Ravagers Now, when you say "can just completely deny a whole mineral line from mining", that's not really fair either. If the Terran is greedy, and tries to get the whole mineral line, you should be able to attack the Liberator without taking damage. In some instances, where there are "dead air spots", I think the Liberator can only barely cover a couple of patches on one base, and sometimes it's the third. So if you're calling me out for unfair bias, I might have to point out that I think this is at least a mischaracterization of the issue. No?
You say, "zerg has to invest in 3 ravagers(300 gas) to just chase them away". I would add that three ravagers can kill a Liberator if they launch bile while it's in AG mode. And, isn't chasing them away or killing them a successful defense? I guess I don't see the issue here. Terran has to open gas first, into double gas, into factory (100 gas) -> Starport (100 gas) -> Armory (100 gas) before they can even enter AG mode, while building the first Liberator (150 gas). So you can defend my 450 gas tech-rush play with 300 gas. What's the issue? You're in the green a full 150 gas, and you're probably significantly more in the green on minerals.
RE: The unit is too good The unit fills a critical role for Terran in Legacy, especially because of the extremely deadly new units added to both the Zerg and Protoss arsenal. It doesn't fill the role of a tank, because the tank has a radial range. It's definitely not a Thor, because the Liberator is a glass cannon, and is fast, and it's not a banshee, because it can't cloak and is immobile while attacking.
Please correct me, or push back, on what I got wrong here.
Few patches yeah uh no.. The advantage of other races is that they can tech so heavily early game compared to Zerg, and zerg can't just mine as much gas as the other races do without hurting their own economy heavily. The problem is like early hots hellbat drops, you can probably defend it, but even if you do it perfectly you will still be behind.
And yes it does make thors and banshees completely obsolete, it's better at harras then a banshee by far, is a lot faster then thors and can be reactored. I do agree tanks are still very useful due to their splash, but liberators can zone out armies almost just as well. But keep being bias as fuck, that's fine, just don't be suprised when the nerf hammer is gonna hit this unit hard.
The reason why he's being biased and downplaying any disadvantages Z has is because he doesn't want that nerf hammer to hit hard. He's gotten to the point of being Avilo-level denial on Terran superiority.
On September 10 2015 09:17 TimeSpiral wrote: And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
You need to realize that with the current macro mechanic changes, terran has received a huge boost to their economy thanks to mules AND supply drops, which means they will be at least even on economy with zerg for a while. Going lair very early just so you can deal with liberators is a huge commitment of resources that could have been drones at the 3rd base and even if you do go, you are most likely not gonna achieve anything because liberators will hit your mineral line and prevent you from mining, while terran safely takes his 3rd. Even ravagers with range upgrade come too late and by the time you throw those shots off, you're most likely gonna lose much more resources than him (mining time + lost ravagers). What's worse is that on some positions (orbital shipyard bottom spawn as zerg) they can LOCK DOWN your production because liberators can shoot down on larvae/eggs and when you can't make any units, the game is just over because you will die from terran's next push.
I shudder anytime something starts with "[let me inform you] you need to realize [...]". Ugh! But I get it. I guess it's just colloquial. Terran did not receive a huge boost to their economy, unless you're talking about the one week where we did not have MULEs and couldn't win anything other than TvTs. Supply dropping is completely stupid now with scans costing 100 energy. And are you saying Terrans are rushing Liberators and taking a quick 3rd while the first one is preventing some mining on one of your three hatches? Just build units and go kill the Terran.
I guess let me ask this question, because maybe I'm confused: should a Terran who invests in a high-tech rush play be able to cause some damage if the Zerg is unprepared, or caught of guard? It almost feels like the argument is "I should be able to defend easily with my fast three-hatch drone only openers." So please, inform me what an acceptable scenario looks like to you.
On September 10 2015 15:06 mCon.Hephaistas wrote:
On September 10 2015 09:17 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 10 2015 08:47 EonuS wrote: my opinion of moving liberators to fusion core tech still stands, because even if you give liberators a ATG upgrade on tech lab, it can still come way too fast for zerg to have any reasonable counter to it (liberator production time + movement to zerg's base and the upgrade is essentially done anyway), especially when you can't hit them with either spores or queens on certain maps and lock down your economy altogether.
I'm not terribly opposed to the Fusion Core requirement either, as long as it's not Fusion Core and tech lab. But this would slow the Liberator rush by about 50 seconds (best case). More likely around 60 seconds. That seems like a fairly severe nerf, especially when the play can be dealt with currently, it can just be overly difficult if you're caught off guard.
And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
On September 10 2015 04:15 Big J wrote:
On September 10 2015 04:05 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 10 2015 03:52 Big J wrote:
On September 10 2015 03:48 TheWinks wrote: Equivalent cost Thors would do the same thing.
nope
Come on, Big J. That video can't be used as any credible evidence. It would be like unstimmed marines walking into a ball of banelings and then QQ'ing that banelings are wildly broken. If that Protoss waits until the Liberators enter AG mode then that fight looks so much different.
Did I say something like that? I just find his argument stupid. He is comparing a highly microable air unit with a slow, ground walker. I don't think you can make 5 Thors stack like that and jump on top of an opponent who is making a movement mistake like that.
If his point is that in theory other units have that damage output then I don't see the point of his argument. Of course. 27widow mines are the same cost as those liberators and massively outperform those liberators in that situation. That doesn't make them "do the same thing". Or be a viable strategy.
I don't think the video shows something broken. It just highlights once again how stupid starcraft air stacking is. In this scenario the "too strong" (stacking liberators for insane damage density) and "too volatile" side (having half of your army one-shot due to stacking) at once.
Gotcha. Misunderstood. I also dislike the air stacking. I guess it's meant to simulate the vertical plane, but it's just bad.
On September 10 2015 04:30 parkufarku wrote:
On September 09 2015 23:14 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 09 2015 10:41 parkufarku wrote:
On September 09 2015 08:11 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 09 2015 07:03 zelderan wrote: [quote]
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.
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.
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?
Yeah, it's normal to assume Zerg will produce defensive units to shut down their harrass, but the main crux of the voices of posters on this thread are saying that the harrass comes too early, and it's just too powerful that cannot be shut down with spores / queens. When Mutas come, even AA on Liberators is devastating with splash.
Terran doesn't have to rush tanks or rush starport just to defend from special harass from Zerg. Terran can go 4M and counter anything Zerg does.
The bottom line is that Liberators come too early, and they are too powerful for their costs (1 shot hydras? was the Blizz balance team drunk when they made this?), to the point where Z cannot effectively deal with it when their only viable anti-air fighting unit gets sniped before it gets into firing range.
Well, I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high tech Starport unit ; ) But moving on from that ... Mutas easily beat liberators in small numbers with magic box. So if you rush mutas versus a liberator rush you'll be fine to push away the liberators.
Zerg doesn't have the same type of early harass units for a pretty fairly obvious reason: larva. Imagine producing an early banshee, or Adepts, or void rays with larva? Lulz. It's a legitimate complaint that Zerg's early harass isn't really as strong, but the tradeoff is that Zerg has the strongest economic openers. Then Mutas are probably one of the best harass / map control / tech switch game winners in the game.
Blizzard agrees that the Liberator comes too early, and they're nerfing it. If it's too powerful, they will nerf the damage. It's a single-target DPS unit with a relatively small effective attack area (AG mode). For the cost, I don't think it's too powerful, from a DPS perspective.
Man this has to be the most bias post yet. Ofcourse Zerg should be able to counter liberators on hatch tech, there is no way zerg can tech up in time to deal with it in time without sacrificing a lot of eco. Also you saying earlier that the timing window is already so small to do damage with them, yeah because it's totally fair they can just completely deny a whole mineral line from mining and zerg has to invest in 3 ravagers(300 gas) to just chase them away.
Anyway I thinkchanging the timing of the ground attack mode will help a ton. But I still think this unit will be too good, like it does everything a banshee, thor and siege tank does, but better. I really haven't seen a single banshee yet since this unit got introduced and thors are really rare aswell now. I just don't see how it's fair that a unit can have so many roles at once without being broken, last time we saw this with the infestor and we all know how that ended.
Well, I'm definitely speaking from a Terran perspective. So, I guess that's a bias. Sure. But the way you said it seemed like you were implying that my bias was unfairly skewing my observations. I'm fine with being wrong. We're all just discussing the game we love here. So, please, if I made an unfair comment, or am just wrong about something, please point it out. I felt like my comments (at least the one you quoted) were fair.
RE: hatch tech To be fair, I said " I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high-tech Starport unit ". I stand behind that statement. But you might be talking about when I said, "And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals". Which I will submit is poorly worded. That bit about minerals was me saying, "you should have to spend some gas to defend this." And the other play I was referring to is the cloaked banshee rush.
RE: Ravagers Now, when you say "can just completely deny a whole mineral line from mining", that's not really fair either. If the Terran is greedy, and tries to get the whole mineral line, you should be able to attack the Liberator without taking damage. In some instances, where there are "dead air spots", I think the Liberator can only barely cover a couple of patches on one base, and sometimes it's the third. So if you're calling me out for unfair bias, I might have to point out that I think this is at least a mischaracterization of the issue. No?
You say, "zerg has to invest in 3 ravagers(300 gas) to just chase them away". I would add that three ravagers can kill a Liberator if they launch bile while it's in AG mode. And, isn't chasing them away or killing them a successful defense? I guess I don't see the issue here. Terran has to open gas first, into double gas, into factory (100 gas) -> Starport (100 gas) -> Armory (100 gas) before they can even enter AG mode, while building the first Liberator (150 gas). So you can defend my 450 gas tech-rush play with 300 gas. What's the issue? You're in the green a full 150 gas, and you're probably significantly more in the green on minerals.
RE: The unit is too good The unit fills a critical role for Terran in Legacy, especially because of the extremely deadly new units added to both the Zerg and Protoss arsenal. It doesn't fill the role of a tank, because the tank has a radial range. It's definitely not a Thor, because the Liberator is a glass cannon, and is fast, and it's not a banshee, because it can't cloak and is immobile while attacking.
Please correct me, or push back, on what I got wrong here.
Go back and check my image spots on moonlight madness whole bases can be covered whilst being in a safe spot, everyone must agree that the ATG limits map making design with it's 15 range.
I remember the post. A lot of work, and potentially useful analysis (if it's accurate). And yeah, spores cannot hit Liberators in certain positions on certain maps. Might need ravagers. Also, I would ask that you produce one or several pro-level matches of Legacy where Zerg builds ravagers and cannot attack a rushed Liberator. The dead space argument is brought up a lot, which would suggest that it's broken, which would suggest that we should be seeing it in virtually every game where Liberators are rushed, right? I've watched a lot of Legacy, and I just don't see this happening.
Why was the (if it's accurate) bit even included, I showed the Turret which has exactly the same range of a spore and queen so people know that I wasn't just arbitrarily drawing a line. Why don't people do it in pro game? Because they've not seen that it's possible or because they think there's better value in using them to stop transfers from 2nd to 3rd allowing for an easy base pick off. I have seen on streams people abuse the spots though, with moonlight madness being the most abusable map.
On September 10 2015 09:17 TimeSpiral wrote: And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
You need to realize that with the current macro mechanic changes, terran has received a huge boost to their economy thanks to mules AND supply drops, which means they will be at least even on economy with zerg for a while. Going lair very early just so you can deal with liberators is a huge commitment of resources that could have been drones at the 3rd base and even if you do go, you are most likely not gonna achieve anything because liberators will hit your mineral line and prevent you from mining, while terran safely takes his 3rd. Even ravagers with range upgrade come too late and by the time you throw those shots off, you're most likely gonna lose much more resources than him (mining time + lost ravagers). What's worse is that on some positions (orbital shipyard bottom spawn as zerg) they can LOCK DOWN your production because liberators can shoot down on larvae/eggs and when you can't make any units, the game is just over because you will die from terran's next push.
I shudder anytime something starts with "[let me inform you] you need to realize [...]". Ugh! But I get it. I guess it's just colloquial. Terran did not receive a huge boost to their economy, unless you're talking about the one week where we did not have MULEs and couldn't win anything other than TvTs. Supply dropping is completely stupid now with scans costing 100 energy. And are you saying Terrans are rushing Liberators and taking a quick 3rd while the first one is preventing some mining on one of your three hatches? Just build units and go kill the Terran.
I guess let me ask this question, because maybe I'm confused: should a Terran who invests in a high-tech rush play be able to cause some damage if the Zerg is unprepared, or caught of guard? It almost feels like the argument is "I should be able to defend easily with my fast three-hatch drone only openers." So please, inform me what an acceptable scenario looks like to you.
On September 10 2015 15:06 mCon.Hephaistas wrote:
On September 10 2015 09:17 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 10 2015 08:47 EonuS wrote: my opinion of moving liberators to fusion core tech still stands, because even if you give liberators a ATG upgrade on tech lab, it can still come way too fast for zerg to have any reasonable counter to it (liberator production time + movement to zerg's base and the upgrade is essentially done anyway), especially when you can't hit them with either spores or queens on certain maps and lock down your economy altogether.
I'm not terribly opposed to the Fusion Core requirement either, as long as it's not Fusion Core and tech lab. But this would slow the Liberator rush by about 50 seconds (best case). More likely around 60 seconds. That seems like a fairly severe nerf, especially when the play can be dealt with currently, it can just be overly difficult if you're caught off guard.
And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
On September 10 2015 04:15 Big J wrote:
On September 10 2015 04:05 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 10 2015 03:52 Big J wrote:
On September 10 2015 03:48 TheWinks wrote: Equivalent cost Thors would do the same thing.
nope
Come on, Big J. That video can't be used as any credible evidence. It would be like unstimmed marines walking into a ball of banelings and then QQ'ing that banelings are wildly broken. If that Protoss waits until the Liberators enter AG mode then that fight looks so much different.
Did I say something like that? I just find his argument stupid. He is comparing a highly microable air unit with a slow, ground walker. I don't think you can make 5 Thors stack like that and jump on top of an opponent who is making a movement mistake like that.
If his point is that in theory other units have that damage output then I don't see the point of his argument. Of course. 27widow mines are the same cost as those liberators and massively outperform those liberators in that situation. That doesn't make them "do the same thing". Or be a viable strategy.
I don't think the video shows something broken. It just highlights once again how stupid starcraft air stacking is. In this scenario the "too strong" (stacking liberators for insane damage density) and "too volatile" side (having half of your army one-shot due to stacking) at once.
Gotcha. Misunderstood. I also dislike the air stacking. I guess it's meant to simulate the vertical plane, but it's just bad.
On September 10 2015 04:30 parkufarku wrote:
On September 09 2015 23:14 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 09 2015 10:41 parkufarku wrote:
On September 09 2015 08:11 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 09 2015 07:03 zelderan wrote: [quote]
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.
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.
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?
Yeah, it's normal to assume Zerg will produce defensive units to shut down their harrass, but the main crux of the voices of posters on this thread are saying that the harrass comes too early, and it's just too powerful that cannot be shut down with spores / queens. When Mutas come, even AA on Liberators is devastating with splash.
Terran doesn't have to rush tanks or rush starport just to defend from special harass from Zerg. Terran can go 4M and counter anything Zerg does.
The bottom line is that Liberators come too early, and they are too powerful for their costs (1 shot hydras? was the Blizz balance team drunk when they made this?), to the point where Z cannot effectively deal with it when their only viable anti-air fighting unit gets sniped before it gets into firing range.
Well, I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high tech Starport unit ; ) But moving on from that ... Mutas easily beat liberators in small numbers with magic box. So if you rush mutas versus a liberator rush you'll be fine to push away the liberators.
Zerg doesn't have the same type of early harass units for a pretty fairly obvious reason: larva. Imagine producing an early banshee, or Adepts, or void rays with larva? Lulz. It's a legitimate complaint that Zerg's early harass isn't really as strong, but the tradeoff is that Zerg has the strongest economic openers. Then Mutas are probably one of the best harass / map control / tech switch game winners in the game.
Blizzard agrees that the Liberator comes too early, and they're nerfing it. If it's too powerful, they will nerf the damage. It's a single-target DPS unit with a relatively small effective attack area (AG mode). For the cost, I don't think it's too powerful, from a DPS perspective.
Man this has to be the most bias post yet. Ofcourse Zerg should be able to counter liberators on hatch tech, there is no way zerg can tech up in time to deal with it in time without sacrificing a lot of eco. Also you saying earlier that the timing window is already so small to do damage with them, yeah because it's totally fair they can just completely deny a whole mineral line from mining and zerg has to invest in 3 ravagers(300 gas) to just chase them away.
Anyway I thinkchanging the timing of the ground attack mode will help a ton. But I still think this unit will be too good, like it does everything a banshee, thor and siege tank does, but better. I really haven't seen a single banshee yet since this unit got introduced and thors are really rare aswell now. I just don't see how it's fair that a unit can have so many roles at once without being broken, last time we saw this with the infestor and we all know how that ended.
Well, I'm definitely speaking from a Terran perspective. So, I guess that's a bias. Sure. But the way you said it seemed like you were implying that my bias was unfairly skewing my observations. I'm fine with being wrong. We're all just discussing the game we love here. So, please, if I made an unfair comment, or am just wrong about something, please point it out. I felt like my comments (at least the one you quoted) were fair.
RE: hatch tech To be fair, I said " I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high-tech Starport unit ". I stand behind that statement. But you might be talking about when I said, "And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals". Which I will submit is poorly worded. That bit about minerals was me saying, "you should have to spend some gas to defend this." And the other play I was referring to is the cloaked banshee rush.
RE: Ravagers Now, when you say "can just completely deny a whole mineral line from mining", that's not really fair either. If the Terran is greedy, and tries to get the whole mineral line, you should be able to attack the Liberator without taking damage. In some instances, where there are "dead air spots", I think the Liberator can only barely cover a couple of patches on one base, and sometimes it's the third. So if you're calling me out for unfair bias, I might have to point out that I think this is at least a mischaracterization of the issue. No?
You say, "zerg has to invest in 3 ravagers(300 gas) to just chase them away". I would add that three ravagers can kill a Liberator if they launch bile while it's in AG mode. And, isn't chasing them away or killing them a successful defense? I guess I don't see the issue here. Terran has to open gas first, into double gas, into factory (100 gas) -> Starport (100 gas) -> Armory (100 gas) before they can even enter AG mode, while building the first Liberator (150 gas). So you can defend my 450 gas tech-rush play with 300 gas. What's the issue? You're in the green a full 150 gas, and you're probably significantly more in the green on minerals.
RE: The unit is too good The unit fills a critical role for Terran in Legacy, especially because of the extremely deadly new units added to both the Zerg and Protoss arsenal. It doesn't fill the role of a tank, because the tank has a radial range. It's definitely not a Thor, because the Liberator is a glass cannon, and is fast, and it's not a banshee, because it can't cloak and is immobile while attacking.
Please correct me, or push back, on what I got wrong here.
Few patches yeah uh no.. The advantage of other races is that they can tech so heavily early game compared to Zerg, and zerg can't just mine as much gas as the other races do without hurting their own economy heavily. The problem is like early hots hellbat drops, you can probably defend it, but even if you do it perfectly you will still be behind.
And yes it does make thors and banshees completely obsolete, it's better at harras then a banshee by far, is a lot faster then thors and can be reactored. I do agree tanks are still very useful due to their splash, but liberators can zone out armies almost just as well. But keep being bias as fuck, that's fine, just don't be suprised when the nerf hammer is gonna hit this unit hard.
The reason why he's being biased and downplaying any disadvantages Z has is because he doesn't want that nerf hammer to hit hard. He's gotten to the point of being Avilo-level denial on Terran superiority.
I guess so,hard to argue with such people. Anyway I do hope blizzard will find a way to make the liberator a strong but unique unit. I just think it hits a bit too early and that's why it's a bit too strong in TvZ. In the midgame it should be a strong unit like it is at the moment, but it's overlapping too much with other units roles imo.
On September 10 2015 09:17 TimeSpiral wrote: And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
You need to realize that with the current macro mechanic changes, terran has received a huge boost to their economy thanks to mules AND supply drops, which means they will be at least even on economy with zerg for a while. Going lair very early just so you can deal with liberators is a huge commitment of resources that could have been drones at the 3rd base and even if you do go, you are most likely not gonna achieve anything because liberators will hit your mineral line and prevent you from mining, while terran safely takes his 3rd. Even ravagers with range upgrade come too late and by the time you throw those shots off, you're most likely gonna lose much more resources than him (mining time + lost ravagers). What's worse is that on some positions (orbital shipyard bottom spawn as zerg) they can LOCK DOWN your production because liberators can shoot down on larvae/eggs and when you can't make any units, the game is just over because you will die from terran's next push.
I shudder anytime something starts with "[let me inform you] you need to realize [...]". Ugh! But I get it. I guess it's just colloquial. Terran did not receive a huge boost to their economy, unless you're talking about the one week where we did not have MULEs and couldn't win anything other than TvTs. Supply dropping is completely stupid now with scans costing 100 energy. And are you saying Terrans are rushing Liberators and taking a quick 3rd while the first one is preventing some mining on one of your three hatches? Just build units and go kill the Terran.
I guess let me ask this question, because maybe I'm confused: should a Terran who invests in a high-tech rush play be able to cause some damage if the Zerg is unprepared, or caught of guard? It almost feels like the argument is "I should be able to defend easily with my fast three-hatch drone only openers." So please, inform me what an acceptable scenario looks like to you.
On September 10 2015 15:06 mCon.Hephaistas wrote:
On September 10 2015 09:17 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 10 2015 08:47 EonuS wrote: my opinion of moving liberators to fusion core tech still stands, because even if you give liberators a ATG upgrade on tech lab, it can still come way too fast for zerg to have any reasonable counter to it (liberator production time + movement to zerg's base and the upgrade is essentially done anyway), especially when you can't hit them with either spores or queens on certain maps and lock down your economy altogether.
I'm not terribly opposed to the Fusion Core requirement either, as long as it's not Fusion Core and tech lab. But this would slow the Liberator rush by about 50 seconds (best case). More likely around 60 seconds. That seems like a fairly severe nerf, especially when the play can be dealt with currently, it can just be overly difficult if you're caught off guard.
And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals.
On September 10 2015 04:15 Big J wrote:
On September 10 2015 04:05 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 10 2015 03:52 Big J wrote:
On September 10 2015 03:48 TheWinks wrote: Equivalent cost Thors would do the same thing.
nope
Come on, Big J. That video can't be used as any credible evidence. It would be like unstimmed marines walking into a ball of banelings and then QQ'ing that banelings are wildly broken. If that Protoss waits until the Liberators enter AG mode then that fight looks so much different.
Did I say something like that? I just find his argument stupid. He is comparing a highly microable air unit with a slow, ground walker. I don't think you can make 5 Thors stack like that and jump on top of an opponent who is making a movement mistake like that.
If his point is that in theory other units have that damage output then I don't see the point of his argument. Of course. 27widow mines are the same cost as those liberators and massively outperform those liberators in that situation. That doesn't make them "do the same thing". Or be a viable strategy.
I don't think the video shows something broken. It just highlights once again how stupid starcraft air stacking is. In this scenario the "too strong" (stacking liberators for insane damage density) and "too volatile" side (having half of your army one-shot due to stacking) at once.
Gotcha. Misunderstood. I also dislike the air stacking. I guess it's meant to simulate the vertical plane, but it's just bad.
On September 10 2015 04:30 parkufarku wrote:
On September 09 2015 23:14 TimeSpiral wrote:
On September 09 2015 10:41 parkufarku wrote:
On September 09 2015 08:11 TimeSpiral wrote: [quote]
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.
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?
Yeah, it's normal to assume Zerg will produce defensive units to shut down their harrass, but the main crux of the voices of posters on this thread are saying that the harrass comes too early, and it's just too powerful that cannot be shut down with spores / queens. When Mutas come, even AA on Liberators is devastating with splash.
Terran doesn't have to rush tanks or rush starport just to defend from special harass from Zerg. Terran can go 4M and counter anything Zerg does.
The bottom line is that Liberators come too early, and they are too powerful for their costs (1 shot hydras? was the Blizz balance team drunk when they made this?), to the point where Z cannot effectively deal with it when their only viable anti-air fighting unit gets sniped before it gets into firing range.
Well, I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high tech Starport unit ; ) But moving on from that ... Mutas easily beat liberators in small numbers with magic box. So if you rush mutas versus a liberator rush you'll be fine to push away the liberators.
Zerg doesn't have the same type of early harass units for a pretty fairly obvious reason: larva. Imagine producing an early banshee, or Adepts, or void rays with larva? Lulz. It's a legitimate complaint that Zerg's early harass isn't really as strong, but the tradeoff is that Zerg has the strongest economic openers. Then Mutas are probably one of the best harass / map control / tech switch game winners in the game.
Blizzard agrees that the Liberator comes too early, and they're nerfing it. If it's too powerful, they will nerf the damage. It's a single-target DPS unit with a relatively small effective attack area (AG mode). For the cost, I don't think it's too powerful, from a DPS perspective.
Man this has to be the most bias post yet. Ofcourse Zerg should be able to counter liberators on hatch tech, there is no way zerg can tech up in time to deal with it in time without sacrificing a lot of eco. Also you saying earlier that the timing window is already so small to do damage with them, yeah because it's totally fair they can just completely deny a whole mineral line from mining and zerg has to invest in 3 ravagers(300 gas) to just chase them away.
Anyway I thinkchanging the timing of the ground attack mode will help a ton. But I still think this unit will be too good, like it does everything a banshee, thor and siege tank does, but better. I really haven't seen a single banshee yet since this unit got introduced and thors are really rare aswell now. I just don't see how it's fair that a unit can have so many roles at once without being broken, last time we saw this with the infestor and we all know how that ended.
Well, I'm definitely speaking from a Terran perspective. So, I guess that's a bias. Sure. But the way you said it seemed like you were implying that my bias was unfairly skewing my observations. I'm fine with being wrong. We're all just discussing the game we love here. So, please, if I made an unfair comment, or am just wrong about something, please point it out. I felt like my comments (at least the one you quoted) were fair.
RE: hatch tech To be fair, I said " I'm fine with spore and queens doing a less than perfect job against my high-tech Starport unit ". I stand behind that statement. But you might be talking about when I said, "And I'm perfectly fine with Zerg not being able to completely fend off two of my high-tech rush plays with hatch tech and minerals". Which I will submit is poorly worded. That bit about minerals was me saying, "you should have to spend some gas to defend this." And the other play I was referring to is the cloaked banshee rush.
RE: Ravagers Now, when you say "can just completely deny a whole mineral line from mining", that's not really fair either. If the Terran is greedy, and tries to get the whole mineral line, you should be able to attack the Liberator without taking damage. In some instances, where there are "dead air spots", I think the Liberator can only barely cover a couple of patches on one base, and sometimes it's the third. So if you're calling me out for unfair bias, I might have to point out that I think this is at least a mischaracterization of the issue. No?
You say, "zerg has to invest in 3 ravagers(300 gas) to just chase them away". I would add that three ravagers can kill a Liberator if they launch bile while it's in AG mode. And, isn't chasing them away or killing them a successful defense? I guess I don't see the issue here. Terran has to open gas first, into double gas, into factory (100 gas) -> Starport (100 gas) -> Armory (100 gas) before they can even enter AG mode, while building the first Liberator (150 gas). So you can defend my 450 gas tech-rush play with 300 gas. What's the issue? You're in the green a full 150 gas, and you're probably significantly more in the green on minerals.
RE: The unit is too good The unit fills a critical role for Terran in Legacy, especially because of the extremely deadly new units added to both the Zerg and Protoss arsenal. It doesn't fill the role of a tank, because the tank has a radial range. It's definitely not a Thor, because the Liberator is a glass cannon, and is fast, and it's not a banshee, because it can't cloak and is immobile while attacking.
Please correct me, or push back, on what I got wrong here.
Go back and check my image spots on moonlight madness whole bases can be covered whilst being in a safe spot, everyone must agree that the ATG limits map making design with it's 15 range.
I remember the post. A lot of work, and potentially useful analysis (if it's accurate). And yeah, spores cannot hit Liberators in certain positions on certain maps. Might need ravagers. Also, I would ask that you produce one or several pro-level matches of Legacy where Zerg builds ravagers and cannot attack a rushed Liberator. The dead space argument is brought up a lot, which would suggest that it's broken, which would suggest that we should be seeing it in virtually every game where Liberators are rushed, right? I've watched a lot of Legacy, and I just don't see this happening.
Why was the (if it's accurate) bit even included, I showed the Turret which has exactly the same range of a spore and queen so people know that I wasn't just arbitrarily drawing a line. Why don't people do it in pro game? Because they've not seen that it's possible or because they think there's better value in using them to stop transfers from 2nd to 3rd allowing for an easy base pick off. I have seen on streams people abuse the spots though, with moonlight madness being the most abusable map.
The accuracy bit is just cautious hedging (screenshots from some guy on the Internet, no offense intended). It probably is accurate, and is useful if people want to memorize the limitations of static defense versus Liberator rushes on the current map pool. It really was excellent work.
I would argue that pros are the absolute best at exploiting this game. If something is broken, it is almost exclusively pro matches that highlight the break. Suggesting that pros don't know about these spots is a stretch, imo. I think you're probably more accurate in your assessment that these "dead zones" are just not as valuable as people make them out to be (otherwise pros would abuse them more, no?).
And for you guys, hCom and Parku -- just pick one or several of my positions and actually argue your view. The approach of just saying, "yeah uh no ..." and name-calling is just that. *shrugs* I've laid out my points clearly. If they're wrong, so be it. Show us. Show me.
ZvT feels awful against liberators. They already have two zoning units with mines + tanks, a third one is not what this game needs. At higher ranks, when people really know where to utilize liberators so that you cannot engage properly, it is quite painful for the opponent.
But once you get broodlord-vipers there is nothing the terran can do. Only mass cyclone can beat that and not guaranteed, zerg then just has to mix in infestors and hit just a single good spell.
On September 12 2015 01:17 The_Masked_Shrimp wrote: But once you get broodlord-vipers there is nothing the terran can do. Only mass cyclone can beat that and not guaranteed, zerg then just has to mix in infestors and hit just a single good spell.
Uhhhh what? Mass Vikings + BCs with Thors + Tanks just demolish anything Zerg has, including Broodlords / Vipers / Corrupters. Unlike Z's spores, Terran turrets are also able to be built anywhere on map, which solidifies the Terran advantage that's already there. Watch this game. Zerg has way more economy but has no unit to actually defend against this.
On September 12 2015 01:17 The_Masked_Shrimp wrote: But once you get broodlord-vipers there is nothing the terran can do. Only mass cyclone can beat that and not guaranteed, zerg then just has to mix in infestors and hit just a single good spell.
Uhhhh what? Mass Vikings + BCs with Thors + Tanks just demolish anything Zerg has, including Broodlords / Vipers / Corrupters. Unlike Z's spores, Terran turrets are also able to be built anywhere on map, which solidifies the Terran advantage that's already there. Watch this game. Zerg has way more economy but has no unit to actually defend against this.
Good job with bringing out hots on lotv discussion.
Good thijg zerg have no answer to air... except vipers have parasitic bomb in lotv that nullifies air in lotv.
Mass Cyclone doesn't even do job against broodlords. You need A2A due to existence of broodlings, not to mention Viper can abduct cyclones by one due to big cost of cyclones. This was pre cyclone G2A nerf
Also, skyterran can no longer have free ride with ground mech upgrades as before, which greatly weakens BCS due to its reliance on it. Corruptors, while shit unit, does its job in direct A2A combat and beats viking in direct combat due to its large health pool unless kited, which isn't option during engagement with broodlords
On September 12 2015 01:17 The_Masked_Shrimp wrote: But once you get broodlord-vipers there is nothing the terran can do. Only mass cyclone can beat that and not guaranteed, zerg then just has to mix in infestors and hit just a single good spell.
Uhhhh what? Mass Vikings + BCs with Thors + Tanks just demolish anything Zerg has, including Broodlords / Vipers / Corrupters. Unlike Z's spores, Terran turrets are also able to be built anywhere on map, which solidifies the Terran advantage that's already there. Watch this game. Zerg has way more economy but has no unit to actually defend against this.
But to your points: Terran can spend money to build structures around the map (turrets). Zerg can spend energy to spread free, invisible, buildings that prevent those buildings from going up while granting vision and a permanent speed buff to all. Plus, Zerg has two forms of semi-mobile static defense: spores and spines. A Terran with a huge bank spamming turrets hardly "solidifies the Terran advantage".
I just recently watched a HotS game ... I think it was Marinelord vs. Zanster? Something like that. Marinelord had the exact comp you're talking about, and still couldn't handle the Zerg late-game tech switches.
But, back to the main point: This is the LotV beta. Show me an example of this issue in LotV and we'll talk.
Last time I checked, Zergs didn't get a new anti-air fighting unit (ravagers don't count). Yes Vipers can nullify but spellcasters aren't just sufficient. Z needs an actual fighting unit against it. That is why it's ok to compare the 2 games. Bonuses of a creep is not involved in this discussion, because Z units are weaker, melee units that need the speed buff to fight against kiting bio due to its range. I'm solely talking about the 2 static defenses: spores / turrets. Turrets can be built anywhere; spores need creep, and creep can be denied constantly with vigilent scan / clearing.
On September 15 2015 04:22 parkufarku wrote: Last time I checked, Zergs didn't get a new anti-air fighting unit (ravagers don't count). Yes Vipers can nullify but spellcasters aren't just sufficient. Z needs an actual fighting unit against it. That is why it's ok to compare the 2 games. Bonuses of a creep is not involved in this discussion, because Z units are weaker, melee units that need the speed buff to fight against kiting bio due to its range. I'm solely talking about the 2 static defenses: spores / turrets. Turrets can be built anywhere; spores need creep, and creep can be denied constantly with vigilent scan / clearing.
No it is not OK to compare because of that. You got the most broken spell in the game with Parasitic Bomb. I am not seeing this composition in LotV - which is why you cannot produce any LotV evidence of it.
You are derailing this thread just like ZerlingSherperd used to do.
On September 12 2015 01:17 The_Masked_Shrimp wrote: But once you get broodlord-vipers there is nothing the terran can do. Only mass cyclone can beat that and not guaranteed, zerg then just has to mix in infestors and hit just a single good spell.
Uhhhh what? Mass Vikings + BCs with Thors + Tanks just demolish anything Zerg has, including Broodlords / Vipers / Corrupters. Unlike Z's spores, Terran turrets are also able to be built anywhere on map, which solidifies the Terran advantage that's already there. Watch this game. Zerg has way more economy but has no unit to actually defend against this.
I like how you told off another poster for being biased and unreasonable, yet here you are, posting a HotS replay for a LotV discussion for your cause.
People saying that the answer to Terran liberators being absolutely broken vs Zerg are Vipers and Brood lords are clearly playing this game at such a low level, a spell caster at Hive tech and T3 Tech cannot be the logical answer to being completely unable to correctly ingage due to Liberators, also if Terran has 10 Liberators with his composition and has them split out with a nice number of Vikings, what is the answer then? Parasitic bomb all day, go back consume, do it again, and hope you win?
Please.....
The low level analysis and Terran players defending liberators is funny, also saying Roach Ravager Hydra is the answer to mech is also silly.
Tank + Liberator outscales and outranges ravagers so easily, throw a few banshees in the mix in the early game before hydras are there and it is even easier. All Terran has to do is micro decent and not get hit by Corrosive bile, there is no way for Zerg to properly engage.
Every Terran player that thinks Zerg can easily tech up to Parasitic Bomb and that is the answer to everything, you clearly know nothing about this game and are playing at a really low level.
On September 15 2015 06:46 GGzerG wrote: People saying that the answer to Terran liberators being absolutely broken vs Zerg are Vipers and Brood lords are clearly playing this game at such a low level, a spell caster at Hive tech and T3 Tech cannot be the logical answer to being completely unable to correctly ingage due to Liberators, also if Terran has 10 Liberators with his composition and has them split out with a nice number of Vikings, what is the answer then? Parasitic bomb all day, go back consume, do it again, and hope you win?
Please.....
The low level analysis and Terran players defending liberators is funny, also saying Roach Ravager Hydra is the answer to mech is also silly.
Tank + Liberator outscales and outranges ravagers so easily, throw a few banshees in the mix in the early game before hydras are there and it is even easier. All Terran has to do is micro decent and not get hit by Corrosive bile, there is no way for Zerg to properly engage.
Every Terran player that thinks Zerg can easily tech up to Parasitic Bomb and that is the answer to everything, you clearly know nothing about this game and are playing at a really low level.
Some pretty sweeping generalizations. Zerg currently has the most broken mechanic I've ever seen: automatic spawn larva. Even more broken than the Khaydarin Amulet! And you've got to go way back for that one. But that's beside the point.
I don't think anyone is suggestion Vipers are the answer to the Liberator rush. And if they are, they are very clearly wrong. Spores, Queens, and Ravagers, with maybe 2-base muta do just fine against that extremely aggressive Terran opener. I believe the argument for Vipers is late game, as it's a Hive Tech unit. Because Sky Terran--when it gets scary--is obviously very late game.
And argument like this, "All Terran has to do is micro decent and not get hit by Corrosive bile" is a two-way argument. I could just as easily say, "all Zerg has to do is use their free hatch-tech cooldown spell and land dem corrosive biles". It's the same argument.
I get it though. It's tough to win a SC2 game. It's frustrating. Matchmaker forces you to play opponents much better than you, and it just looks so easy for them. So easy it must be broken! Granted: in some cases, it is. Liberator probably comes a little too early, Ultras are unkillable derp-fests, and Adepts are way too strong in the early game.
On September 15 2015 04:22 parkufarku wrote: That is why it's ok to compare the 2 games.
We might have to agree to disagree here. I don't think you can use one HotS game as an example to illustrate a detailed conversation in the LotV beta.
Ooh, you edited your post! Ravagers anti-air skill shot absolutely counts as a new anti-air measure.
Oh, right, because I listed out the difference between HotS and LotV (Viper spell) and included it in my discussion while other variables stayed the same, but it still can't be used as an illustration because it would hurt your argument that 'Zerg is fine.' It's really unpleasant responding to a super-biased Terran like you because you deny anything that gives your race a disadvantage. Thankfully, TL is not full of race-biased posters that can have reasonable discussions without twisting/exaggerating the truth.
On September 15 2015 04:22 parkufarku wrote: Last time I checked, Zergs didn't get a new anti-air fighting unit (ravagers don't count). Yes Vipers can nullify but spellcasters aren't just sufficient. Z needs an actual fighting unit against it. That is why it's ok to compare the 2 games. Bonuses of a creep is not involved in this discussion, because Z units are weaker, melee units that need the speed buff to fight against kiting bio due to its range. I'm solely talking about the 2 static defenses: spores / turrets. Turrets can be built anywhere; spores need creep, and creep can be denied constantly with vigilent scan / clearing.
No it is not OK to compare because of that. You got the most broken spell in the game with Parasitic Bomb. I am not seeing this composition in LotV - which is why you cannot produce any LotV evidence of it.
You are derailing this thread just like ZerlingSherperd used to do.
And you are derailing this thread just like TimeSpiral is doing. Spells cost energy. Energy takes time. Even consume takes time. So let's say Zerg is able to use Parasitic Bomb to defend against T sky-army. Then what? Hope that you did enough damage with your insufficient AA combined with the spell that Terran doesn't steamroll you by the time your energy is recovered?? "Broken spell" is YOUR opinion. Just because others don't agree with your view doesn't give you the right to accuse another user is derailing the thread in hopes of getting a user banned, just like you guys did with ZerglingSheperd.
On September 15 2015 06:46 GGzerG wrote: People saying that the answer to Terran liberators being absolutely broken vs Zerg are Vipers and Brood lords are clearly playing this game at such a low level, a spell caster at Hive tech and T3 Tech cannot be the logical answer to being completely unable to correctly ingage due to Liberators, also if Terran has 10 Liberators with his composition and has them split out with a nice number of Vikings, what is the answer then? Parasitic bomb all day, go back consume, do it again, and hope you win?
Please.....
The low level analysis and Terran players defending liberators is funny, also saying Roach Ravager Hydra is the answer to mech is also silly.
Tank + Liberator outscales and outranges ravagers so easily, throw a few banshees in the mix in the early game before hydras are there and it is even easier. All Terran has to do is micro decent and not get hit by Corrosive bile, there is no way for Zerg to properly engage.
Every Terran player that thinks Zerg can easily tech up to Parasitic Bomb and that is the answer to everything, you clearly know nothing about this game and are playing at a really low level.
Well you do realise that he was talking about a HotS game don't you? There are a lot of imbalances at the moment and it will release unbalanced due to the 10th November release date.
The 13 range Ravager is not an answer to siege tanks and Liberators? The Liberator needing a TL for an AG upgrade is not an answer to slowing the number of Liberators you will face? Blizzard is dealing with it - are you saying you want even more?
On September 15 2015 04:22 parkufarku wrote: That is why it's ok to compare the 2 games.
We might have to agree to disagree here. I don't think you can use one HotS game as an example to illustrate a detailed conversation in the LotV beta.
Ooh, you edited your post! Ravagers anti-air skill shot absolutely counts as a new anti-air measure.
Oh, right, because I listed out the difference between HotS and LotV (Viper spell) and included it in my discussion while other variables stayed the same, but it still can't be used as an illustration because it would hurt your argument that 'Zerg is fine.' It's really unpleasant responding to a super-biased Terran like you because you deny anything that gives your race a disadvantage. Thankfully, TL is not full of race-biased posters that can have reasonable discussions without twisting/exaggerating the truth.
On September 15 2015 04:22 parkufarku wrote: Last time I checked, Zergs didn't get a new anti-air fighting unit (ravagers don't count). Yes Vipers can nullify but spellcasters aren't just sufficient. Z needs an actual fighting unit against it. That is why it's ok to compare the 2 games. Bonuses of a creep is not involved in this discussion, because Z units are weaker, melee units that need the speed buff to fight against kiting bio due to its range. I'm solely talking about the 2 static defenses: spores / turrets. Turrets can be built anywhere; spores need creep, and creep can be denied constantly with vigilent scan / clearing.
No it is not OK to compare because of that. You got the most broken spell in the game with Parasitic Bomb. I am not seeing this composition in LotV - which is why you cannot produce any LotV evidence of it.
You are derailing this thread just like ZerlingSherperd used to do.
And you are derailing this thread just like TimeSpiral is doing. Spells cost energy. Energy takes time. Even consume takes time. So let's say Zerg is able to use Parasitic Bomb to defend against T sky-army. Then what? Hope that you did enough damage with your insufficient AA combined with the spell that Terran doesn't steamroll you by the time your energy is recovered?? "Broken spell" is YOUR opinion. Just because others don't agree with your view doesn't give you the right to accuse another user is derailing the thread in hopes of getting a user banned, just like you guys did with ZerglingSheperd.
But you are using a HotS game to argue for imbalance in LotV.
There are imbalances and at this point we need to wait and see what the next balance patch brings because Blizzard are addressing issues (slowly). They have said this is an area that they are looking at. Their changes will significantly impact what we see and what we will communicate back to them. Arguing for this change or that (or whining) at the moment is therefore moot.
On September 15 2015 06:46 GGzerG wrote: People saying that the answer to Terran liberators being absolutely broken vs Zerg are Vipers and Brood lords are clearly playing this game at such a low level, a spell caster at Hive tech and T3 Tech cannot be the logical answer to being completely unable to correctly ingage due to Liberators, also if Terran has 10 Liberators with his composition and has them split out with a nice number of Vikings, what is the answer then? Parasitic bomb all day, go back consume, do it again, and hope you win?
Please.....
The low level analysis and Terran players defending liberators is funny, also saying Roach Ravager Hydra is the answer to mech is also silly.
Tank + Liberator outscales and outranges ravagers so easily, throw a few banshees in the mix in the early game before hydras are there and it is even easier. All Terran has to do is micro decent and not get hit by Corrosive bile, there is no way for Zerg to properly engage.
Every Terran player that thinks Zerg can easily tech up to Parasitic Bomb and that is the answer to everything, you clearly know nothing about this game and are playing at a really low level.
Well you do realise that he was talking about a HotS game don't you? There are a lot of imbalances at the moment and it will release unbalanced due to the 10th November release date.
The 13 range Ravager is not an answer to siege tanks and Liberators? The Liberator needing a TL for an AG upgrade is not an answer to slowing the number of Liberators you will face? Blizzard is dealing with it - are you saying you want even more?
13 Range Ravager is NOT the answer for SIEGE TANKS & Liberators, Do you think you can just mass a bunch of 13 range Ravagers, and take out a tank line / liberator line with ease? Please do post replays of this happening, thanks.
I wish they would have tested the delayed Liberator change before releasing this ridiculous range 13 ravager. My TvZ went from 75% to 15% in a single patch. I wonder if it's the same thing Blizzard did with the Infestor back in the day, over buffing it to encourage people to use it, only to nerf it later when people have gotten used to the unit (much later than they should have obviously).
I don't think a single change has effected me this much in all of SC2 lol.
On September 15 2015 06:46 GGzerG wrote: People saying that the answer to Terran liberators being absolutely broken vs Zerg are Vipers and Brood lords are clearly playing this game at such a low level, a spell caster at Hive tech and T3 Tech cannot be the logical answer to being completely unable to correctly ingage due to Liberators, also if Terran has 10 Liberators with his composition and has them split out with a nice number of Vikings, what is the answer then? Parasitic bomb all day, go back consume, do it again, and hope you win?
Please.....
The low level analysis and Terran players defending liberators is funny, also saying Roach Ravager Hydra is the answer to mech is also silly.
Tank + Liberator outscales and outranges ravagers so easily, throw a few banshees in the mix in the early game before hydras are there and it is even easier. All Terran has to do is micro decent and not get hit by Corrosive bile, there is no way for Zerg to properly engage.
Every Terran player that thinks Zerg can easily tech up to Parasitic Bomb and that is the answer to everything, you clearly know nothing about this game and are playing at a really low level.
Well you do realise that he was talking about a HotS game don't you? There are a lot of imbalances at the moment and it will release unbalanced due to the 10th November release date.
The 13 range Ravager is not an answer to siege tanks and Liberators? The Liberator needing a TL for an AG upgrade is not an answer to slowing the number of Liberators you will face? Blizzard is dealing with it - are you saying you want even more?
13 Range Ravager is NOT the answer for SIEGE TANKS & Liberators, Do you think you can just mass a bunch of 13 range Ravagers, and take out a tank line / liberator line with ease? Please do post replays of this happening, thanks.
That's right, you can't even get vision to shoot since terran has air control, and when you do have vision, you won't kill a single siege tank before taking damage as well. That if the player is bad, because a good one will just micro his siege tanks with mediavacs.
In late game, when you get parasitic bomb and get air control, they just build turrets to prevent you from getting vision. Killing turrets covered by tanks with corrosive bile is too slow to be effective and force all your corruptors, vipers and ravagers to stay together sieging the terran, leaving him free to harass with hellbats, siege tank drops and liberators, and take you apart.
Another factor that is bothering me: The unit is ofc great vs ground units, but it is also great vs mutas. They are not supposed to be great vs mutas. It is one of those units that is just "great vs everything" - at least in the early/mid game. And such units suck design-wise. For me, this unit is absolutely needless. The role of zoning out units is already being played by tanks and mines. The role of splash vs air is already being played by thors and mines.The role of harassing is already being played by countless other units. There is just no room for this unit in the game. Too bad they are forced to add new units because, well, it is an expansion after all.
The unit is ofc great vs ground units, but it is also great vs mutas. They are not supposed to be great vs mutas.
They beat phoenix and void rays too if they get past fairly small numbers
Take a look at 0:45. That's 4 liberators (600/600) against 9 void rays (2250/1450). You also need 6 stargate void ray to match unit count with a terran who has 3 reactor starports making liberators
Terrans dropping 2 extra starports (to go to 3) and then producing 18 liberators in literally 2 minutes and 9 seconds in actual games is fucked up for any race to respond to, i can't imagine it getting past beta. It just feels like a joke (even if that many libs are not a particularly great thing to do strategically)
The unit is ofc great vs ground units, but it is also great vs mutas. They are not supposed to be great vs mutas.
They beat phoenix and void rays too if they get past fairly small numbers
Take a look at 0:45. That's 4 liberators (600/600) against 9 void rays (2250/1450). You also need 6 stargate void ray to match unit count with a terran who has 3 reactor starports making liberators https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=45&v=kJaQILPIvt0
Terrans dropping 2 extra starports (to go to 3) and then producing 18 liberators in literally 2 minutes and 9 seconds in actual games is fucked up for any race to respond to, i can't imagine it getting past beta. It just feels like a joke (even if that many libs are not a particularly great thing to do strategically)
And how many refineries do you need to support that ? One refinery produces ~121 gas/minute(~242 per base). You want to produce units worth 1800 gas in 2 minutes... Do the math. Not including the 3 starports with reactors...
The unit is ofc great vs ground units, but it is also great vs mutas. They are not supposed to be great vs mutas.
They beat phoenix and void rays too if they get past fairly small numbers
Take a look at 0:45. That's 4 liberators (600/600) against 9 void rays (2250/1450). You also need 6 stargate void ray to match unit count with a terran who has 3 reactor starports making liberators https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=45&v=kJaQILPIvt0
Terrans dropping 2 extra starports (to go to 3) and then producing 18 liberators in literally 2 minutes and 9 seconds in actual games is fucked up for any race to respond to, i can't imagine it getting past beta. It just feels like a joke (even if that many libs are not a particularly great thing to do strategically)
And how many refineries do you need to support that ? One refinery produces ~121 gas/minute(~242 per base). You want to produce 1800 gas worth of units in 2 minutes... Do the math. Not including the 3 starports with reactors...
900-1800 gas isn't much to ask of a terran who's on 3 CC's for the last 5 minutes building bio with no need for vikings or more than a few medivacs. ~3-7 min third is fairly standard. You don't need 18 (which would need 2k gas banked to produce straight out) - i don't even think 18 libs is good strategically - but people actually do that shit on ladder.
Starports are cheaper than Stargates when it comes to building X strength army in Y time.
This is not even the main balance problem with libs, it's just like "wtf i can't believe this is actually in the game" because even if it had a tech lab requirement it'd be a really good unit. It's twice as hard to build a banshee squad and why would you want to? Liberators are better units.
The unit is ofc great vs ground units, but it is also great vs mutas. They are not supposed to be great vs mutas.
They beat phoenix and void rays too if they get past fairly small numbers
Take a look at 0:45. That's 4 liberators (600/600) against 9 void rays (2250/1450). You also need 6 stargate void ray to match unit count with a terran who has 3 reactor starports making liberators https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=45&v=kJaQILPIvt0
Terrans dropping 2 extra starports (to go to 3) and then producing 18 liberators in literally 2 minutes and 9 seconds in actual games is fucked up for any race to respond to, i can't imagine it getting past beta. It just feels like a joke (even if that many libs are not a particularly great thing to do strategically)
And how many refineries do you need to support that ? One refinery produces ~121 gas/minute(~242 per base). You want to produce 1800 gas worth of units in 2 minutes... Do the math. Not including the 3 starports with reactors...
900-1800 gas isn't much to ask of a terran who's on 3 CC's for the last 5 minutes building bio with no need for vikings or more than a few medivacs. ~3-7 min third is fairly standard. You don't need 18 (which would need 2k gas banked to produce straight out) - i don't even think 18 libs is good strategically - but people actually do that shit on ladder.
Starports are cheaper than Stargates when it comes to building X strength army in Y time.
This is not even the main balance problem with libs, it's just like "wtf i can't believe this is actually in the game" because even if it had a tech lab requirement it'd be a really good unit. It's twice as hard to build a banshee squad and why would you want to? Liberators are better units.
I agree that they should require tech-lab, but just that. There is no need to nerf them to the ground, just because they seem quite strong in the beta. And I don't agree that banshees are worse units. They are just different. The banshee is stronger vs ground , is the better harass and more mobile unit AND can go invisible... So yeah, both have advantages.
The unit is ofc great vs ground units, but it is also great vs mutas. They are not supposed to be great vs mutas.
They beat phoenix and void rays too if they get past fairly small numbers
Take a look at 0:45. That's 4 liberators (600/600) against 9 void rays (2250/1450). You also need 6 stargate void ray to match unit count with a terran who has 3 reactor starports making liberators https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=45&v=kJaQILPIvt0
Terrans dropping 2 extra starports (to go to 3) and then producing 18 liberators in literally 2 minutes and 9 seconds in actual games is fucked up for any race to respond to, i can't imagine it getting past beta. It just feels like a joke (even if that many libs are not a particularly great thing to do strategically)
4 liberators don't defeat 9 voidrays ingame, liberators barely do any damage to non-light units unless they are super clumped, other wise units like corruptors, void rays and vikings do short work of liberators.
The unit is ofc great vs ground units, but it is also great vs mutas. They are not supposed to be great vs mutas.
They beat phoenix and void rays too if they get past fairly small numbers
Take a look at 0:45. That's 4 liberators (600/600) against 9 void rays (2250/1450). You also need 6 stargate void ray to match unit count with a terran who has 3 reactor starports making liberators https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=45&v=kJaQILPIvt0
Terrans dropping 2 extra starports (to go to 3) and then producing 18 liberators in literally 2 minutes and 9 seconds in actual games is fucked up for any race to respond to, i can't imagine it getting past beta. It just feels like a joke (even if that many libs are not a particularly great thing to do strategically)
4 liberators don't defeat 9 voidrays ingame, liberators barely do any damage to non-light units unless they are super clumped, other wise units like corruptors, void rays and vikings do short work of liberators.
How are you going to compare 9 voidrays to 4 liberators? 1 voidray costs 100 more mineral and 2 more supply than 1 liberator. Good one.
I just played my first game of LOTV and I played terran, but crap these liberators are strong, you can get them out early and rek a mineral line with them, and by the time they get decent static D up your liberators will have dealt signifcant economic damage. At the end of the game there was a big fight and I just crushed my opponent with the help of a couple of liberators, they seem really strong IMO. Ofc I've only played 1 game of LOTV so far, but my first impressions are "imba unit."
The unit is ofc great vs ground units, but it is also great vs mutas. They are not supposed to be great vs mutas.
They beat phoenix and void rays too if they get past fairly small numbers
Take a look at 0:45. That's 4 liberators (600/600) against 9 void rays (2250/1450). You also need 6 stargate void ray to match unit count with a terran who has 3 reactor starports making liberators https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=45&v=kJaQILPIvt0
Terrans dropping 2 extra starports (to go to 3) and then producing 18 liberators in literally 2 minutes and 9 seconds in actual games is fucked up for any race to respond to, i can't imagine it getting past beta. It just feels like a joke (even if that many libs are not a particularly great thing to do strategically)
4 liberators don't defeat 9 voidrays ingame, liberators barely do any damage to non-light units unless they are super clumped, other wise units like corruptors, void rays and vikings do short work of liberators.
The unit is ofc great vs ground units, but it is also great vs mutas. They are not supposed to be great vs mutas.
They beat phoenix and void rays too if they get past fairly small numbers
Take a look at 0:45. That's 4 liberators (600/600) against 9 void rays (2250/1450). You also need 6 stargate void ray to match unit count with a terran who has 3 reactor starports making liberators https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=45&v=kJaQILPIvt0
Terrans dropping 2 extra starports (to go to 3) and then producing 18 liberators in literally 2 minutes and 9 seconds in actual games is fucked up for any race to respond to, i can't imagine it getting past beta. It just feels like a joke (even if that many libs are not a particularly great thing to do strategically)
4 liberators don't defeat 9 voidrays ingame, liberators barely do any damage to non-light units unless they are super clumped, other wise units like corruptors, void rays and vikings do short work of liberators.
I linked the video to show the splash radius
I mean, that was a LotV demo video release by Blizz, right? In the VR scenario they were focusing a command center with Liberators clearly in range, taking pot-shots. It is still a nice display of the radius though, but not exactly representative of VR's utility versus Liberators (though I don't think VRs are really intended to fight Libs very well).
Zerg and Protoss will start needed to do split micro to maximize the utility of their AA Air Units versus the Liberator in AA Mode.
The unit is ofc great vs ground units, but it is also great vs mutas. They are not supposed to be great vs mutas.
They beat phoenix and void rays too if they get past fairly small numbers
Take a look at 0:45. That's 4 liberators (600/600) against 9 void rays (2250/1450). You also need 6 stargate void ray to match unit count with a terran who has 3 reactor starports making liberators https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=45&v=kJaQILPIvt0
Terrans dropping 2 extra starports (to go to 3) and then producing 18 liberators in literally 2 minutes and 9 seconds in actual games is fucked up for any race to respond to, i can't imagine it getting past beta. It just feels like a joke (even if that many libs are not a particularly great thing to do strategically)
4 liberators don't defeat 9 voidrays ingame, liberators barely do any damage to non-light units unless they are super clumped, other wise units like corruptors, void rays and vikings do short work of liberators.
I linked the video to show the splash radius
But it doesn't really, the demo video has liberators stats exagerated, I'm not here defending the liberator or anything, I think is pretty IMBA too, I'm just saying that if you are making an argument you should at least use actual gameplay to prove it and not a video that doesn't shows the liberators real stats
The unit is ofc great vs ground units, but it is also great vs mutas. They are not supposed to be great vs mutas.
They beat phoenix and void rays too if they get past fairly small numbers
Take a look at 0:45. That's 4 liberators (600/600) against 9 void rays (2250/1450). You also need 6 stargate void ray to match unit count with a terran who has 3 reactor starports making liberators https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=45&v=kJaQILPIvt0
Terrans dropping 2 extra starports (to go to 3) and then producing 18 liberators in literally 2 minutes and 9 seconds in actual games is fucked up for any race to respond to, i can't imagine it getting past beta. It just feels like a joke (even if that many libs are not a particularly great thing to do strategically)
4 liberators don't defeat 9 voidrays ingame, liberators barely do any damage to non-light units unless they are super clumped, other wise units like corruptors, void rays and vikings do short work of liberators.
I linked the video to show the splash radius
No you didn't.
'They beat phoenix and void rays too if they get past fairly small numbers'
They generally beat phoenix, as they should, but the dps in that video against non-light air is very different from live.
On September 16 2015 04:08 SCguineapig wrote: I just played my first game of LOTV and I played terran, but crap these liberators are strong, you can get them out early and rek a mineral line with them, and by the time they get decent static D up your liberators will have dealt signifcant economic damage. At the end of the game there was a big fight and I just crushed my opponent with the help of a couple of liberators, they seem really strong IMO. Ofc I've only played 1 game of LOTV so far, but my first impressions are "imba unit."
The unit is ofc great vs ground units, but it is also great vs mutas. They are not supposed to be great vs mutas.
They beat phoenix and void rays too if they get past fairly small numbers
Take a look at 0:45. That's 4 liberators (600/600) against 9 void rays (2250/1450). You also need 6 stargate void ray to match unit count with a terran who has 3 reactor starports making liberators https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=45&v=kJaQILPIvt0
Terrans dropping 2 extra starports (to go to 3) and then producing 18 liberators in literally 2 minutes and 9 seconds in actual games is fucked up for any race to respond to, i can't imagine it getting past beta. It just feels like a joke (even if that many libs are not a particularly great thing to do strategically)
4 liberators don't defeat 9 voidrays ingame, liberators barely do any damage to non-light units unless they are super clumped, other wise units like corruptors, void rays and vikings do short work of liberators.
I linked the video to show the splash radius
I mean, that was a LotV demo video release by Blizz, right? In the VR scenario they were focusing a command center with Liberators clearly in range, taking pot-shots. It is still a nice display of the radius though, but not exactly representative of VR's utility versus Liberators (though I don't think VRs are really intended to fight Libs very well).
Zerg and Protoss will start needed to do split micro to maximize the utility of their AA Air Units versus the Liberator in AA Mode.
Split micro is just very awkward/unusable when there are many of them stacking and splashing you with a big splash radius. Even magic-boxed units get splashed - look at the splash radius in the video again.
They basically do ok in small numbers (as expected for a unit that is, at it's core, an anti-ground siege unit) but are extremely good in mid-large numbers.
No you didn't.
Yes i did
They generally beat phoenix, as they should
As they should? Phoenix are more dedicated anti air than libs and their slightly cheaper cost is offset by increased cost of production buildings to make enough to win fights. Why should liberators win air fights against phoenix, void rays, mutas and corruptors cost for cost, supply vs supply and production time vs production time? They're probably pretty decent against Vikings too.
Libs are worth their weight in gold when you have 4-6 of them in a midgame engagement
As they should? Phoenix are more dedicated anti air than libs and their slightly cheaper cost is offset by increased cost of production buildings to make enough to win fights. Why should liberators win air fights against phoenix, void rays, mutas and corruptors cost for cost, supply vs supply and production time vs production time? They're probably pretty decent against Vikings too.
Libs are worth their weight in gold when you have 4-6 of them in a midgame engagement
No they don't do well vs vikings, or corruptors, or carriers, or tempest, or void rays unless they are really clumped and you have a ton of liberators.
No the splash isn't as big, neither the damage, as it was showed in the demo video.
Yes I agree liberators are too strong for their costs, specially the AG but the AA also, but you are blowing things out of proportion.
The splash is pretty huge, i can't say for sure if it's actually as big as in the video but it's surprisingly big. I'l test out some air to air fights with amove, magic box, pre-split etc soon.
but you are blowing things out of proportion.
perhaps so, there's a lot of people biased on the other side of the discussion so i'd like at least an even playing field (especially when it obviously needs to be looked at in some form, even if only having tech lab requirement added).
I wouldn't want the "numbers seem a little wonky at the moment" discussion buried under a ton of people saying "it's completely fine" until 2 months after launch when liberators are used every game and a matchup flips 60/40 because of it, so i'd often rather go against the crowd in discussion with very powerful new units.
The splash is pretty huge, i can't say for sure if it's actually as big as in the video but it's surprisingly big. I'l test out some air to air fights with amove, magic box, pre-split etc soon.
perhaps so, there's a lot of people biased on the other side of the discussion so i'd like at least an even playing field (especially when it obviously needs to be looked at in some form, even if only having tech lab requirement added).
I wouldn't want the "numbers seem a little wonky at the moment" discussion buried under a ton of people saying "it's completely fine" until 2 months after launch when liberators are used every game and a matchup flips 60/40 because of it, so i'd often rather go against the crowd in discussion with very powerful new units.
For the record, I think I'm okay with the tech-lab requirement. This is a reasonable nerf to the production cost, maybe, depending on what they do with the AG upgrade.
I do think it's a little unfair to say that you need six stargates to match 3 Reactor Starports, and I think you know this too. Chronoboost. By that time we're pumping mass Liberators off three reactor Starports in LotV, you've got to be--what?--four basing with expansion five and six building? Even if it's a little less, you've definitely got three Chronoboost assignments available for each Stargate. You'll end up building just as much air, for a less expensive production cost (50/50/50 for each reactor). I'll let you have the unlikely scenario that three reactors were prebuilt, and did not disrupt the start time of the Liberators. But, if the reactors were ordered on the Starport, that's a full round of production or more from your CB'd Stargates.
Your production cost and build time arguments do not hold water, in my opinion, even with the Reactor in play. And the reactor doesn't matter versus Zerg either, from a comparative perspective, because they have larva.
I do think it's a little unfair to say that you need six stargates to match 3 Reactor Starports, and I think you know this too. Chronoboost. By that time we're pumping mass Liberators off three reactor Starports in LotV
The guy who build 3port lib against me recently was on 6 gasses w/ a small gas bank (it's very easy to bank gas building marine/marauder when you don't need medivacs or vikings) and it was pretty early in the game. He didn't put reactors on the second and third port very quickly but he could have done.
Dropping 2 extra stargates (to 3) and going straight phoenix (already had a couple) was an inadequate response even though the starports were scouted during construction - he took air dominance and it was not possible to get it back. That surprised me at the time because i already thought that the response of going 3stargate with full chrono phoenix fleet was an overkill response but it actually failed to fight even the liberators alone and changed my perspective on their build time and supply efficiency.
So in order to beat them strongly, you'd need 4 stargates (or 3 stargates with all of your chrono) against 4x lib production (2 starports + reactors or one reactored port + 2 naked ones)
Given the choice between 3 stargates with 100% of your chronoboost on them vs 4 stargates, the 4 stargates is probably the most effective option. It's the lesser of two evils. It costs more, but the opportunity cost of not having chrono on any of your important upgrades and such is probably an even greater cost
By that time we're pumping mass Liberators off three reactor Starports in LotV, you've got to be--what?--four basing with expansion five and six building?
you can make a really surprising amount at a rate of 3-6 at a time with 2-3 cc's
I do think it's a little unfair to say that you need six stargates to match 3 Reactor Starports, and I think you know this too. Chronoboost. By that time we're pumping mass Liberators off three reactor Starports in LotV
The guy who build 3port lib against me recently was on 6 gasses w/ a small gas bank (it's very easy to bank gas building marine/marauder when you don't need medivacs or vikings) and it was pretty early in the game. He didn't put reactors on the second and third port very quickly but he could have done. Dropping 2 extra stargates (to 3) and going straight phoenix (already had a couple) was an inadequate response even though the starports were scouted during construction - he took air dominance and it was not possible to get it back
Given the choice between 4 stargates with 100% of your chronoboost on them (or 4 stargates and all 3 of your nexii chronoing 3 of them) vs 5 stargates, the 5 stargates is probably the most effective option. It's the lesser of two evils. It costs more, but the opportunity cost of not having chrono on any of your important upgrades and such is probably an even greater cost
By that time we're pumping mass Liberators off three reactor Starports in LotV, you've got to be--what?--four basing with expansion five and six building?
Nobody secured a fourth for any significant period of time in that game
Oh, okay. Didn't realize you were talking about one instance of a specific game you played. I feel ya. LotV feels very "Snowball-y" at the moment. This is especially true in Archon Mode.
Either way, you can keep adding conditions, and the like, such as, "I'd rather use my chrono on important upgrades" but that doesn't really change the argument that 3 Stargates with Chronoboost could probably do okay versus three Starports with reactors (cost for cost though, it's probably closer to four Stargates versus three Starports with reactors). Whether or not you choose to do that, or whether or not this is possible in a particular in-game scenario, is not very relevant to the argument, imo.
Not sure where you're going with the gas bank. Sounds like your opponent made a strategic decision and sacrificed vital support units (i.e., medivacs). But talking about specific in-game scenerios out of context of the entire game is pretty pointless too, given the Snowball-y nature of LotV.
I edited post some as you were quoting ~ the new post is better
but that doesn't really change the argument that 3 Stargates with Chronoboost could probably do okay versus three Starports with reactors
3 stargates with chrono (or 4 stargates without) against either 2 reactor ports or the 1 reactor port + 2 naked port combo.
that few stargates cannot deal with 6x lib production
I think there is no situation where it's better to put all of your chrono on 3 stargates for a significant portion of the game rather than building a fourth stargate and using the chrono on stuff like air attack upgrade instead
Not sure where you're going with the gas bank. Sounds like your opponent made a strategic decision and sacrificed vital support units (i.e., medivacs)
Medivac blobs are not vital in a world where liberators exist - nor are viking blobs
Not sure where you're going with the gas bank.
Anyone going 5-10 minutes deep into a lotv game with a bio army (without the need to get those ~6-8 medivacs) will float gas even if they don't take all of their gasses. Gas to mineral ratios are a bit higher in LOTV midgame than in HOTS and bio was already mineral heavy. People are having no real trouble building small to moderate amounts of ghosts, medivacs and libs at the same time if they feel like it, some choose to divert the gas and go nuts with the liberator spam instead which is probably strategically weaker
Oh, okay. Didn't realize you were talking about one instance of a specific game you played
That's just one example which changed my perspective, i've played somewhere between about 10 and 20 liberator games in the last 3 weeks or so. We won that one but really shouldn't have. There have been quite a few that make me think "wtf is this unit" but two things stand out in particular:
simultaneously excellent at anti-air and anti-ground in both supply and cost efficiency build time that doesn't really compare to any other units, you can get a lot of them super fast
I've said a bunch of times i don't think it's very good at all to pull 20 libs out of your ass halfway through a game - but doing so really makes the strengths and weaknesses of the unit obvious and turns the game into these ridiculous situations that look like somebody mashing armies of unit X vs unit Y together in a unit test custom map.
People building crazy amounts of libs in surprisingly little time has been most of my direct interaction with them, that's what people tend to do on ladder because it's very difficult to respond to and nets a lot of free wins even if it's not strategically sound. They'll still be a core army unit without that capability, they're rather good and especially cost+supply effective as 16 supply of liberators (8 libs) causes a disproportional amount of problems for your opponent in the midgame
As they should? Phoenix are more dedicated anti air than libs and their slightly cheaper cost is offset by increased cost of production buildings to make enough to win fights. Why should liberators win air fights against phoenix, void rays, mutas and corruptors cost for cost, supply vs supply and production time vs production time? They're probably pretty decent against Vikings too.
Libs are worth their weight in gold when you have 4-6 of them in a midgame engagement
Should a unit designed for a primary use case of killing light, clumped air be able to cost effectively kill light, clumped air? Yes. Otherwise it's like complaining banelings do too much damage to clumped up marines.They don't trade with void rays, vikings, and corruptors cost efficiently with the barest of micro done by the opponent.
On September 17 2015 00:55 Cyro wrote: perhaps so, there's a lot of people biased on the other side of the discussion so i'd like at least an even playing field (especially when it obviously needs to be looked at in some form, even if only having tech lab requirement added).
Own your opinion, don't try to say you're being a devil's advocate here.
The tech lab requirement would be awful. The liberator is a Thor replacement against light air. It takes ~2 liberators to equal the effectiveness of a Thor. Given their cost this isn't a coincidence. In lower numbers, the Thor is actually more effective! It's only as you increase the number of liberators that they overtake the Thor. If you were to force a tech lab requirement, you would have to compensate it with something like cutting liberator production time or increasing the effectiveness of the unit somehow, like making it 3 food, but stronger and tankier.
but that doesn't really change the argument that 3 Stargates with Chronoboost could probably do okay versus three Starports with reactors
3 stargates with chrono (or 4 stargates without) against either 2 reactor ports or the 1 reactor port + 2 naked port combo.
that few stargates cannot deal with 6x lib production
I think there is no situation where it's better to put all of your chrono on 3 stargates for a significant portion of the game rather than building a fourth stargate and using the chrono on stuff like air attack upgrade instead
Anyone going 5-10 minutes deep into a lotv game with a bio army (without the need to get those ~6-8 medivacs) will float gas even if they don't take all of their gasses. Gas to mineral ratios are a bit higher in LOTV midgame than in HOTS and bio was already mineral heavy. People are having no real trouble building small to moderate amounts of ghosts, medivacs and libs at the same time if they feel like it, some choose to divert the gas and go nuts with the liberator spam instead which is probably strategically weaker
Oh, okay. Didn't realize you were talking about one instance of a specific game you played
That's just one example which changed my perspective, i've played somewhere between about 10 and 20 liberator games in the last 3 weeks or so. We won that one but really shouldn't have. There have been quite a few that make me think "wtf is this unit" but two things stand out in particular:
simultaneously excellent at anti-air and anti-ground in both supply and cost efficiency build time that doesn't really compare to any other units, you can get a lot of them super fast
I've said a bunch of times i don't think it's very good at all to pull 20 libs out of your ass halfway through a game - but doing so really makes the strengths and weaknesses of the unit obvious and turns the game into these ridiculous situations that look like somebody mashing armies of unit X vs unit Y together in a unit test custom map.
People building crazy amounts of libs in surprisingly little time has been most of my direct interaction with them, that's what people tend to do on ladder because it's very difficult to respond to and nets a lot of free wins even if it's not strategically sound. They'll still be a core army unit without that capability, they're rather good and especially cost+supply effective as 16 supply of liberators (8 libs) causes a disproportional amount of problems for your opponent in the midgame
Gotcha. So you're suggesting that Terrans you're facing are just eating the permanent damage from Stim, and trading out, letting the cost effectiveness of the Liberators and Ghosts balance that out? I can see that.
I would quibble with the simultaneous bit, just because they can't do both at the same time. They are either static AG, or mobile AA.
Sounds like me and you are fairly close to the same page. Put Liberators on a tech lab. I think the AG mode at Armory is fine, but some want an upgrade of a fusion core. I'm less inclined to like the fusion core, as we kinda need the armory for air and factory upgrades, and the Fusion Core upgrades are typically considered late game--if used at all.
All three of Terran's powerful anti-ground units can't fucking move, lol (e.g., tanks, widow mines [hate widow mines, for the record], and liberators). I feel like this limitation is almost never referenced. Imagine if Colossus had to enter "Thermal Lance" mode, or something ridiculous like that. That idea would be laughed out of the room (rightfully). Lurkers can't move either, granted, but they're fucking invisible, lol.
Either way. I digress. The Liberator has become essential in all three matchups. Try to win a TvX without Liberators and you get stomped. Somebody mentioned this once, and it resonated with me, that I really don't want the Liberator to become the Colossus of HotS. Basically: build Colossus, or lose. The Liberator is a new unit, that will require responses, and it's not really clear the best way to deal with it yet. I think this is fairly expected, no?
It probably comes a little too fast: agreed. But I like that a risky rush play can do damage. I don't want to see that go away.
It probably should be on a reactor. Fine.
I think the siege/unsiege mode timings might need a tiny bit of tweaking. You have to predict bile shots. It does not seem possible to react to the, atm.
If damage output gets nerfed, at all, I would lobby for the warning indicator to be removed (unless you can click on the Liberator, similar to a siege tank).
I don't think that it comes too early in the game, i think that it's too easy to build a lot of them
The tech lab requirement would be awful. The liberator is a Thor replacement against light air.
Pick a role, anti-air or anti-ground siege unit. It's exceptional at both at the moment and i prefer the anti-ground siege design. Anti-air support is good, anti-air dominator is.. not so good. Thors have way more weaknesses than liberators. There are cooler and more effective ways to make anti-air specialists. If a unit does multiple things at once, it should do them less effectively than specialists - worse than viking/phoenix air to air and worse than tank anti-ground siege, but capable of both easily for example.
Tanks don't have an anti-muta mode yet are they really dominant over liberators in the anti-ground siege role?
On September 17 2015 04:00 Cyro wrote: Pick a role, anti-air or anti-ground siege unit. It's exceptional at both at the moment and i prefer the anti-ground siege design. Anti-air support is good, anti-air dominator is.. not so good. Thors have way more weaknesses than liberators. There are cooler and more effective ways to make anti-air specialists. If a unit does multiple things at once, it should do them less effectively than specialists - worse than viking/phoenix air to air and worse than tank anti-ground siege, but capable of both easily for example
Phoenixes trade decently with non-light air, but their primary purpose is light air. The liberator is not a light air unit and in fact is designed to kill light air effectively, while it does not trade cost effectively with non-light air. Its ATG mode leaves it vulnerable and fills a necessary hole in the terran force in the face of other legacy design changes. We can bicker about balance when it comes to cost and dps or whatever, but this isn't about balance. You just don't want the unit to exist in the role that it was created to fill.
If it's designed to do both roles effectively then it's probably a bit too good at one or both at the moment
I'd rather have liberator than phoenix as anti muta, yet it has the whole ground mode too. You can counter phoenix w/ muta but you need to invest a ton more, having splash inherantly makes a smaller amount of units more dangerous to a pack.
A unit only makes sense within the context of the game it is in. There is no exterior objective measure of too good/too bad to be made. If people were only building liberators that would be an indication that they are too strong relative to opponent units or relative to the strength of other terran units, but they're not being massed like the initial incarnation of the ravager, for instance.
The tech lab requirement would be awful. The liberator is a Thor replacement against light air.
Pick a role, anti-air or anti-ground siege unit. It's exceptional at both at the moment and i prefer the anti-ground siege design. Anti-air support is good, anti-air dominator is.. not so good. Thors have way more weaknesses than liberators. There are cooler and more effective ways to make anti-air specialists. If a unit does multiple things at once, it should do them less effectively than specialists - worse than viking/phoenix air to air and worse than tank anti-ground siege, but capable of both easily for example.
Tanks don't have an anti-muta mode yet are they really dominant over liberators in the anti-ground siege role?
I would quibble with this bit. It's AG mode cannot attack buildings, so It'm no sure you can classify it as a siege unit. In AG mode the Liberator is a single-target DPS unit with a "long-range" -- but that's deceptive to say the range is long, because the range to place targeting area is large, but the range from the center of the targeting area to the edges is quite small. And it can't move. The unit benefits from the long range, but only in one direction. Other long-range units benefit from a radial targeting area, which is omnidirectional by nature.
It is an interesting, when compared with the Thor. The Thor's anti-air mode is really long range, and splash. And it's single-target DPS range is really small, and the DPS is not that high. The Liberator has short AA with Splash, and a similar range in the AG mode (in the targeting area), but a long range in placing the targeting area. I really like the design of the unit. It's interesting, and novel.
On September 17 2015 05:42 TheWinks wrote: A unit only makes sense within the context of the game it is in. There is no exterior objective measure of too good/too bad to be made. If people were only building liberators that would be an indication that they are too strong relative to opponent units or relative to the strength of other terran units, but they're not being massed like the initial incarnation of the ravager, for instance.
Just because it's not the only thing massed does NOT mean it's not too strong.
On September 17 2015 05:42 TheWinks wrote: A unit only makes sense within the context of the game it is in. There is no exterior objective measure of too good/too bad to be made. If people were only building liberators that would be an indication that they are too strong relative to opponent units or relative to the strength of other terran units, but they're not being massed like the initial incarnation of the ravager, for instance.
Just because it's not the only thing massed does NOT mean it's not too strong.
Worst logic I've ever heard.
Not being massed certainly harms the accusation that it is too well rounded of a unit. It could be too strong overall, but it certainly isn't obviously too strong. We could say that about a lot of units in Legacy right now, like the adept, lurker, and the viper with parasitic bomb.
On September 17 2015 05:42 TheWinks wrote: A unit only makes sense within the context of the game it is in. There is no exterior objective measure of too good/too bad to be made. If people were only building liberators that would be an indication that they are too strong relative to opponent units or relative to the strength of other terran units, but they're not being massed like the initial incarnation of the ravager, for instance.
Just because it's not the only thing massed does NOT mean it's not too strong.
Worst logic I've ever heard.
Not being massed certainly harms the accusation that it is too well rounded of a unit. It could be too strong overall, but it certainly isn't obviously too strong. We could say that about a lot of units in Legacy right now, like the adept, lurker, and the viper with parasitic bomb.
Ok, so take Colossus. We give them 100 extra health, nice splash AA, and lower its cost by 100/100/2 supply. That would make them pretty OP right? No one would disagree with that. But would the Protoss player simply just mass these units? No, he would pair them with other gateway units, and also make spellcaster units. Especially when these things only come out of Robo, like how Liberators come out of Starports. Not being purely massed by itself doesn't prove anything.
On September 17 2015 05:42 TheWinks wrote: A unit only makes sense within the context of the game it is in. There is no exterior objective measure of too good/too bad to be made. If people were only building liberators that would be an indication that they are too strong relative to opponent units or relative to the strength of other terran units, but they're not being massed like the initial incarnation of the ravager, for instance.
Just because it's not the only thing massed does NOT mean it's not too strong.
Worst logic I've ever heard.
Not being massed certainly harms the accusation that it is too well rounded of a unit. It could be too strong overall, but it certainly isn't obviously too strong. We could say that about a lot of units in Legacy right now, like the adept, lurker, and the viper with parasitic bomb.
Ok, so take Colossus. We give them 100 extra health, nice splash AA, and lower its cost by 100/100/2 supply. That would make them pretty OP right? No one would disagree with that. But would the Protoss player simply just mass these units? No, he would pair them with other gateway units, and also make spellcaster units. Especially when these things only come out of Robo, like how Liberators come out of Starports. Not being purely massed by itself doesn't prove anything.
Are you seeing high-level LotV games where Terran goes mass Liberator? Or, are you facing players that are going mass Liberator? Everything I've seen includes Liberators in composition, like you'd expect. Similar to the Colossus. The Liberator needs ground support because their directional attack is a vulnerability, as well as their stationary position when in AG mode.
I'm watching many different P players' streams and their T opponents constantly get around 6-8 Liberators in the mid game. Once that count is reached, P players rarely win. It's the Colossus all over again. However, unlike Colossi, which get countered by Vikings pretty effectively, there is no P unit that counters Liberators, except for Carriers. Tempest and voidrays are bad against the bio part of the composition and phoenix die to liberators as soon as there are 4-6 of the latter on the filed.
On September 17 2015 05:42 TheWinks wrote: A unit only makes sense within the context of the game it is in. There is no exterior objective measure of too good/too bad to be made. If people were only building liberators that would be an indication that they are too strong relative to opponent units or relative to the strength of other terran units, but they're not being massed like the initial incarnation of the ravager, for instance.
Just because it's not the only thing massed does NOT mean it's not too strong.
Worst logic I've ever heard.
Not being massed certainly harms the accusation that it is too well rounded of a unit. It could be too strong overall, but it certainly isn't obviously too strong. We could say that about a lot of units in Legacy right now, like the adept, lurker, and the viper with parasitic bomb.
Ok, so take Colossus. We give them 100 extra health, nice splash AA, and lower its cost by 100/100/2 supply. That would make them pretty OP right? No one would disagree with that. But would the Protoss player simply just mass these units? No, he would pair them with other gateway units, and also make spellcaster units. Especially when these things only come out of Robo, like how Liberators come out of Starports. Not being purely massed by itself doesn't prove anything.
No, in that case the colo would start getting massed and you'd work towards a mass colo comp as your endgame because it's super cheap, super effective, and good against everything. Any other units you built would be because you have to, not because you want to. You would want to just build colossus.
On September 18 2015 01:50 CheddarToss wrote: I'm watching many different P players' streams and their T opponents constantly get around 6-8 Liberators in the mid game. Once that count is reached, P players rarely win. It's the Colossus all over again. However, unlike Colossi, which get countered by Vikings pretty effectively, there is no P unit that counters Liberators, except for Carriers. Tempest and voidrays are bad against the bio part of the composition and phoenix die to liberators as soon as there are 4-6 of the latter on the filed.
Oh, don't worry. According to the Terran posters here, since Terrans don't get pure liberators, it's not broken.
On September 18 2015 01:50 CheddarToss wrote: I'm watching many different P players' streams and their T opponents constantly get around 6-8 Liberators in the mid game. Once that count is reached, P players rarely win. It's the Colossus all over again. However, unlike Colossi, which get countered by Vikings pretty effectively, there is no P unit that counters Liberators, except for Carriers. Tempest and voidrays are bad against the bio part of the composition and phoenix die to liberators as soon as there are 4-6 of the latter on the filed.
Okay. 6-8 is not "mass" Liberators, imho. This does seem to be the target number when I play. I don't really understand your complaint. You listed two units that would do well in the given scenario: phoenix and/or carrier.
This is the mid-game. So a direct engagement is likely going to result in a full trade down for both, or a lop-sided victory for the weaker composition, or for the player who has already lost to a snowball effect from earlier in the game. So for you, the phoenix's might die, but now the Liberator's aren't attacking the ground units, so Terran's whole ground army will evaporate, or at least trade poorly, and the some--or all--of the Liberators will die. So you have a situation that--for the most part--works as intended. The units trade out, and perhaps superior tactics / control can tip it one way or another. If the Liberators stay in ground mode, the Terran will trade better on the ground and lose all of the liberators and you'll trade better in the air.
If you build carriers, the Terran can't win anyway, so that's kinda a throw-away statement ; )
The one thing I'll give you is that the Liberator is highlighting a problem for Terran right now. Without this powerful, versatile, skill unit, it feels virtually impossible to win in all three matchups. At least in the current meta, Terran has to go Liberator, or get completely obliterated by Zerg and Toss. (Early game build-order wins and rush cheese excepted, naturally) So in that sense, it does feel a little like the HotS Colossus, which I agree is a bad thing. But I don't necessarily think this problem is because of the Liberator, necessarily, more that the overuse of the Liberator is a symptom of something more fundamental.
Okay. 6-8 is not "mass" Liberators, imho. This does seem to be the target number when I play. I don't really understand your complaint. You listed two units that would do well in the given scenario: phoenix
Did you read the same post as me?
there is no P unit that counters Liberators, except for Carriers. phoenix die to liberators as soon as there are 4-6
Straight carrier on equal footing to terran doesn't really work very well
Without this powerful, versatile, skill unit, it feels virtually impossible to win in all three matchups. At least in the current meta, Terran has to go Liberator, or get completely obliterated by Zerg and Toss. (Early game build-order wins and rush cheese excepted, naturally) So in that sense, it does feel a little like the HotS Colossus, which I agree is a bad thing. But I don't necessarily think this problem is because of the Liberator, necessarily, more that the overuse of the Liberator is a symptom of something more fundamental.
Well, as I've said multiple times in this thread, the Liberator is a too well rounded unit with no real weakness. If it stays this way other T units will have to stay sub par in order to compensate. It would be better to nerf the Liberator and buff other units as needed.
And as for Liberators being a "skill unit", I don't agree. Liberators, due to their mobility and amazing range are rather a low skill unit, in my opinion. Tanks are a skill unit. Liberators are very easy to use in comparison.
They take skill to abuse when you have a few of them, but not 8. At that point you can create a wall of fields and kite back through it or leapfrog them towards a base and use them to cover your army
On September 18 2015 02:49 Cyro wrote: They take skill to abuse when you have a few of them, but not 8. At that point you just get to the point where you have a wall of liberator fields up and your opponent has to attack into them for any reason
Yes, but they don't get abused very often against P, because P can deal very well with low numbers of them.
On September 18 2015 02:49 Cyro wrote: They take skill to abuse when you have a few of them, but not 8. At that point you just get to the point where you have a wall of liberator fields up and your opponent has to attack into them for any reason
Yes, but they don't get abused very often against P, because P can deal very well with low numbers of them.
with stargate opening, sure
you said yourself though
I'm watching many different P players' streams and their T opponents constantly get around 6-8 Liberators in the mid game. Once that count is reached, P players rarely win
Well, now that I've played almost to Masters I guess I could chime in with an ever so slightly educated opinion on the Liberator.
While the unit itself might not be "OP" it has a variety of problems that remind me of the Infestor/Colossus all kind of mixed into one big bag of crap.
First off, I like the fact that it's a Starport unit that can hold it's own against Mutalisks in small numbers because we all know Vikings CAN fight Mutalisks once they have stacks of armor upgrades and 12+ of them, as a Zerg player watching the Mutalisk deathball rip Terran bases to shreds sucks.
On the note of the "Mutalisk deathball" Terran probably already has at least 3 reliable ways of countering this. Mutalisks no matter how stacked get massacred by Marines, Widow Mines, and Thors, so did Terran really need yet another way of fighting them? Eventually so many counters are going to be added that Mutalisks will be built only to shut down drops just like when Phoenix was overbuffed with the upgrade which kind of made Mutalisks obsolete in ZvP. Is that really what we want? One of the most micro heavy and skill cap units in the game to get phased out for idiot units like the Cyclone?
Second off, the ground attack is mildly overpowered even if there are ways of dealing with it, Zerg does not need another situation like Sentry/Immortal where no matter how well you play you are kind of just relying on the other player to make a mistake because when executed properly it's more so on your opponent then you. The radius needs to be nerfed for offensive purposes alone and the main thing that it does...
Is that is creates another method of Cancer turtle mech. Once Terran stacks Turrets, Tanks, and Liberators, they ruled the skies/ground all at once, the Liberator burst damage making it suicidal to engage the army Vipers be damned. No more cancer mech PLEASE.
Third off and another contributor (probably half) of the reason it's OP is that it's reactored, I'm sorry but thats merely the typical David Kim "Let's make the unit so strong that they HAVE to test it out" approach, this needs to be the first nerf, then we can talk about the AOE on the ground mode.
Also, for a design team that seems so incredibly against units overlapping, the Liberator overlaps with several Terran units VERY obviously, why build Thors when Liberators? Why build Vikings when Liberators? Banshees are good, but Liberators do the same drone line damage or more AND can kill Overlords.
Adding a tech lab requirement and nerfing the radius to the release radius would be fine, I think.
But the damage _should_ be scary. If you're not afraid to step in the circle, what's the point? Space control needs to be in the game, whether the lIberator or the tank does it is immaterial.
So many of the problems in this game come down to a lack of defender's advantage and consequently, a lack of positional play. If you can't leave a few units behind to defend, you're forever stuck with moving your entire deathball around everywhere.
Slow compositions need to be viable without deathballing, and to do that they need to have units that control space well.
Damage powerful, yes, but 1 shotting Hydras? Are you kidding me? That's Zerg's only reliable air-attacking ground unit and it gets 1 shot before it even has a chance to counter-attack. Unable to create counter-play and pure dominance just destroys not only the balance but also the game. It has no place in SC2.
At this point, we can agree that : tech lab requirement, radius reduction, damage reduction is deserved.
If you reduce the radius, it's easier to avoid getting hit in the first place. If you walk your hydras into a prepared Liberator field, there's no way you should be getting a cost-efficient trade. If you allow your opponent to control a choke with a bunch of Liberators, you should be at a severe disadvantage.
I could see reducing the damage and upping the fire rare to get the same dps (so 60-ish damage with cooldown ~1.2) to avoid one-shots on expensive units like hydras/templars/sentries. But that's not interesting.
It would be better to go the opposite direction. Double the damage and double the cooldown. Say 150 damage with a 3+ cooldown. Now, if you want to engage Liberators via ground, you can bait out shots with cheap units or avoid them with drop/blink micro, and the Liberator player now has to manually target or risk wasting tons of damage on overkill.
I think tech lab requirement and slightly reduced air splash radius + ground AOE area would be a good start. AG damage is extremely high and that sucks for hydralisks but it's at least somewhat appropriate if it's sieged and only in a specific area.
On September 18 2015 07:49 Cyro wrote: I think tech lab requirement and slightly reduced air splash radius + ground AOE area would be a good start. AG damage is extremely high and that sucks for hydralisks but it's at least somewhat appropriate if it's sieged and only in a specific area.
I think you just missed it. This is a fast moving thread.
You and I both agree on the tech lab. That will slow down the ability to get the correct composition.
Reduced air splash radius - I don't think I'm on board with this. But I don't know that I'm horribly against it either. As long as the ability to counter mutas effectively is still there. But I also don't mind my opponent having to do some micro, as so many other units in the game force micro.
AG mode is not AOE. It's single-target DPS. I think that because there is a warning graphic of the attack radius, people assume this is an AOE. The radius is already fairly small, considering the attack radius of many other artillery ships (this is Terran's only artillery ship, keep in mind. Before this, we didn't have one.).
I've said it before, but it's worth repeating: if the damage gets nerfed in any significant way, I would like to see the warning graphic for the opponent removed. If utilizing the targeting range of the liberation zone, the Liberator itself is vulnerable from something like a 300-315 degree angle. This makes it incredibly vulnerable to flanks (and the obvious inability to shoot AA attacks while in AG mode).
Oh ... and, uh ... so here it is:
On Sept 17 2015, Blizzard wrote
Liberator's Defender Mode requires research again. Cost is 150/150. Research time is 79 seconds. Researched at Starport with Tech Lab
I've said it before, but it's worth repeating: if the damage gets nerfed in any significant way, I would like to see the warning graphic for the opponent removed.
I don't think this should be done ever for sake of clarity, especially when the liberation zone range is cast by a unit that could fly over a cliff and/or shoot from 1.5x vision range away. Moving your army and then instantly losing 30% of it instantaneously to units that were 1.5x vision range away and stacking their liberation zones would be terrible, terrible gameplay (lol u see what i did there)
The main problem with the liberation zone isn't really the range it's cast from. Hell, it's probably even better if it's close to the liberator. It's just that you can drop half a dozen of them in a line like giant forcefields and then leap forwards and the enemy can't respond because if he chases your 80 supply army with his 80 supply army, he'll lose his entire army and the terran will still have 60 supply left. Even if you flank, you can get into the situation easily where terran blobs his entire army together inside the liberation zones - and your army attacking him will die, while his units will take zero friendly fire. "Stand in range of the stimmed bio and kill the liberators over his army" is unfortunately often not an option.
Units having a strength is good, hell i'd love if tanks could do that to some extent (they absolutely cannot, it's way easier to engage into tanks at every stage of the game) but they do so much outside of that one strength (they build twice as fast as tanks and have really good anti-air and mobility) that it seems OP. The research helps a bit since terrans would always build that armory to enter the midgame anyway
Liberator's Defender Mode requires research again. Cost is 150/150. Research time is 79 seconds. Researched at Starport with Tech Lab
Very early game lib was a bit silly sometimes, but never the main problem i think. This change seems primarily aimed at making it more of an investment to get a few in the extremely early game
In this case, he has to keep a tech lab on the starport for 2 production cycles so he can only build 2 instead of 4 with 1 starport in the first 2 production cycles with an addon. They don't have to keep the tech lab on past the 79 second research time
I've said it before, but it's worth repeating: if the damage gets nerfed in any significant way, I would like to see the warning graphic for the opponent removed.
I don't think this should be done ever for sake of clarity, especially when the liberation zone range is cast by a unit that could fly over a cliff and/or shoot from 1.5x vision range away. Moving your army and then instantly losing 30% of it instantaneously to units that were 1.5x vision range away and stacking their liberation zones would be terrible, terrible gameplay (lol u see what i did there)
The main problem with the liberation zone isn't really the range it's cast from. Hell, it's probably even better if it's close to the liberator. It's just that you can drop half a dozen of them in a line like giant forcefields and then leap forwards and the enemy can't respond because if he chases your 80 supply army with his 80 supply army, he'll lose his entire army and the terran will still have 60 supply left. Even if you flank, you can get into the situation easily where terran blobs his entire army together inside the liberation zones - and your army attacking him will die, while his units will take zero friendly fire. "Stand in range of the stimmed bio and kill the liberators over his army" is unfortunately often not an option.
Units having a strength is good, hell i'd love if tanks could do that to some extent (they absolutely cannot, it's way easier to engage into tanks at every stage of the game) but they do so much outside of that one strength (they build twice as fast as tanks and have really good anti-air and mobility) that it seems OP. The research helps a bit since terrans would always build that armory to enter the midgame anyway
Liberator's Defender Mode requires research again. Cost is 150/150. Research time is 79 seconds. Researched at Starport with Tech Lab
Very early game lib was a bit silly sometimes, but never the main problem i think. This change seems primarily aimed at making it more of an investment to get a few in the extremely early game
In this case, he has to keep a tech lab on the starport for 2 production cycles so he can only build 2 instead of 4 with 1 starport in the first 2 production cycles with an addon. They don't have to keep the tech lab on past the 79 second research time
So it seems to me that your primary issue is damage output. But is its damage output really higher than say, Banelings, Lurkers, Colossus, Storm, or Disruptors when they get their juicy hits? Terran doesn't have very powerful AOE options, like Zerg and Toss, we've always relied on single-target DPS units (which support). The tank is maybe the only exception, but discounting TvT, heavy tank use went away in WoL.
Are you just looking for a straight damage nerf? Like, maybe making the AG attack cooldown 1.25 instead of 1.14, or something along those lines?
So it seems to me that your primary issue is damage output
Not really damage output, just the way that they can guarantee that damage to happen if you're attacking into them or backed into a corner (during any kind of attack) because he can daisy chain the zones together fairly easily and kite through them or stand inside them without friendly fire. It's much easier to place them abusively from a unit that has wings and is 1.5x faster than a sentry or tank with substantially higher range.
Phoenix just feels like an awkward/bad response as some people in this thread have stated that liberator is, by design, an AOE anti-light-air unit
Liberator is performing all of its design functions very well in the midgame - it's tailor made for abusing protoss with or without phoenix and the responses don't have the luxury of being tailor made for anti-lib+bio
On September 18 2015 16:11 mCon.Hephaistas wrote: Happy it got nerfed. And TvZ hard? top 50 gm had like 9 zergs in LoTV, must have been so hard to beat Zerg.
There aren't as many korean zergs playing from what I'm seeing. Also I've been seeing vibe crush nova/top majority of the time.
Roach Ravager > Mech.
and if you do play muta style and get to BL/Viper/Corruptors its nearly unbeatable.
Bio/mech still pretty viable.
That's just my impression from streams and playing.
So it seems to me that your primary issue is damage output
Not really damage output, just the way that they can guarantee that damage to happen if you're attacking into them or backed into a corner (during any kind of attack) because he can daisy chain the zones together fairly easily and kite through them or stand inside them without friendly fire. It's much easier to place them abusively from a unit that has wings and is 1.5x faster than a sentry or tank with substantially higher range.
Phoenix just feels like an awkward/bad response as some people in this thread have stated that liberator is, by design, an AOE anti-light-air unit
Liberator is performing all of its design functions very well in the midgame - it's tailor made for abusing protoss with or without phoenix and the responses don't have the luxury of being tailor made for anti-lib+bio
I get what you're saying. I think a lot of this has to do with perception. And I think a lot of this has to do with the warning graphic. (And before I continue, I can see why you think the warning graphic is necessary. It's a fine argument.) Part of the beauty of the Liberator is the psychological effect it seems to have on my opponents (this will fade, though, with time). You throw down that circle, they see it, and think, "ahh, fuck. Can't attack into that or I'm going to take damage!"
Yeah, not shit you're going to take damage. Same way you would if you walked into range of [insert any ranged unit]. But, you can't see a marine's range, you can't see a Hydra's range, you can't see a Colossus's range, so it doesn't impose that type of effect -- alright, maybe the Colossus does, lol : )
So, the Terran gets into a position, wants an engagement, throws down the targeting areas, and now the opponent knows: Terran wants a fight. And you may not want to fight in that area. So it feels like you're submitting to guaranteed damage.
But why is guaranteed damage all of the sudden a bad thing? If I walk into Colossus range, when Protoss wants a fight, I'm taking guaranteed damage. But it can also be a deterrent. Maybe the Terran needs to retreat, throws down some Lib zones, and walks into it. It's a defensive position. Similar to--but not equal to--defensive Storms. Throw some storms, disengage, and make the Terran walk into lethal hell if he wants to pursue you.
Yes, the damage output is high, but as you implied, not insanely high, when you consider the unit in context of all three matchups. I truly believe one of the most effective elements of the unit is the visual impact it has on opponent perception.
It also might be that Protoss doesn't have a great air unit response. Obviously, if the Liberator is in AG mode, Phoenix will shrek them, because they're sitting ducks. If they're in AA mode, then they're not attack your ground army, and that's a win too, right? Phoenix splitting, and tactical maneuvering might need to become a thing because I'm not sure the Void Ray is a reasonable response (the VR being the Viking or the Corrupter of the Toss Sky army). If it goes to the mid-late/late game, and Toss gets carriers though, Terran has no reasonable response to that, atm.
TimeSpiral, it is not a matter of perception or visual impact, the DPS is just plain high and the way the unit dishes out damage makes it perfect for killing Protoss units (low number, high health). I don't think there is a unit, aside from BC with Yamato Cannon, that kills Colossi/Archons as fast.
And P really does not have an air counter that works well against the composition Liberators are used as a part of. Sure Voids are good on paper (in a unit tester), but in real matches they kill Liberators kind of fast and then die to marines in no time. And Voids are more expensive than Liberators, meaning that you will have less ground army than T and just die. The Tempest has the same problem. Phoenix die straight up to a lower number of Liberators, which is why they can't be built, aside from a few very early in the match, to prevent single Liberators from blocking your mineral lines. The only air unit that is good against Liberators and Bio is the Carrier. The problem is getting there. But aside from that, I don't like that P should always have to go for T3 to counter Terran's lower tier units. We already have that on the ground, we don't need that in the air as well.
On September 18 2015 16:11 mCon.Hephaistas wrote: Happy it got nerfed. And TvZ hard? top 50 gm had like 9 zergs in LoTV, must have been so hard to beat Zerg.
top16 had one zerg at some point yesterday, I'm happy to have been one of those who survived in top50 lol
I like the tech lab change, terran finally has to commit to previously low risk high reward unit that dealt game ending damage nine times out of ten just because of how fast it came + mule & supply drop that rocketed terran's economy through the roof
So these are my thoughts on the liberator. I think it's a fantastic unit but the ability to get them in pairs so early in the game stresses the zerg player so much. However the fact that liberators can be produced from reactors puts less stress on terran's production when trying to adapt and rebuild in the later game.
Therefor I think the liberator research to transform into siege-mode should be removed from the game and have the liberator require a tech lab. Additionally I think the tech lab should have a research upgrade allowing the liberator to be built from reactors. This would solve the problem with a stupid amount of liberators in the early game as well as still allowing the terran to rebuild/transition into liberators in the later game.
Also losing your armory in a base trade is such bull crap.
But why is guaranteed damage all of the sudden a bad thing? If I walk into Colossus range, when Protoss wants a fight, I'm taking guaranteed damage. But it can also be a deterrent.
Colossi cost a lot in resources, take longer to build and need a 400/400 building+research that takes forever so if you're opening colossi vs bio, that's pretty much all you're doing. Colossi were also nerfed to unusability in LOTV because of the relationships they had with other units. Engaging into bio supported by 6 libs has the feeling of engaging into a 3 colossus army without marauders or vikings
But why is guaranteed damage all of the sudden a bad thing? If I walk into Colossus range, when Protoss wants a fight, I'm taking guaranteed damage. But it can also be a deterrent.
Colossi cost a lot in resources, take longer to build and need a 400/400 building+research that takes forever so if you're opening colossi vs bio, that's pretty much all you're doing. Colossi were also nerfed to unusability in LOTV because of the relationships they had with other units. Engaging into bio supported by 6 libs has the feeling of engaging into a 3 colossus army without marauders or vikings
They do, it does, and yeah. But I wasn't talking about any of that : )
Anyway, haven't got to watch all of RedBull Archon Finals yet, but I'm expecting this thread will blow up with examples of the imba Liberator!
But why is guaranteed damage all of the sudden a bad thing? If I walk into Colossus range, when Protoss wants a fight, I'm taking guaranteed damage. But it can also be a deterrent.
Colossi cost a lot in resources, take longer to build and need a 400/400 building+research that takes forever so if you're opening colossi vs bio, that's pretty much all you're doing. Colossi were also nerfed to unusability in LOTV because of the relationships they had with other units. Engaging into bio supported by 6 libs has the feeling of engaging into a 3 colossus army without marauders or vikings
They do, it does, and yeah. But I wasn't talking about any of that : )
Anyway, haven't got to watch all of RedBull Archon Finals yet, but I'm expecting this thread will blow up with examples of the imba Liberator!
But why is guaranteed damage all of the sudden a bad thing? If I walk into Colossus range, when Protoss wants a fight, I'm taking guaranteed damage. But it can also be a deterrent.
Colossi cost a lot in resources, take longer to build and need a 400/400 building+research that takes forever so if you're opening colossi vs bio, that's pretty much all you're doing. Colossi were also nerfed to unusability in LOTV because of the relationships they had with other units. Engaging into bio supported by 6 libs has the feeling of engaging into a 3 colossus army without marauders or vikings
They do, it does, and yeah. But I wasn't talking about any of that : )
Anyway, haven't got to watch all of RedBull Archon Finals yet, but I'm expecting this thread will blow up with examples of the imba Liberator!
A singular Liberator was built, and it was a proxy Starport rush, and it was versus Protoss. When a unit or strategy if obviously broken, you tend to see it quite often. Like the Adept, for instance.
p.s. you should really spoiler tag your response, Cheddar : /
What actually beats these when they are in mass? Raven, 18 libs, 4-8 widow mines, couple hellbats and tanks. Sacced bigger corruptor armoy into them twice with presplit. Only 3-5 libs usually died.
But why is guaranteed damage all of the sudden a bad thing? If I walk into Colossus range, when Protoss wants a fight, I'm taking guaranteed damage. But it can also be a deterrent.
Colossi cost a lot in resources, take longer to build and need a 400/400 building+research that takes forever so if you're opening colossi vs bio, that's pretty much all you're doing. Colossi were also nerfed to unusability in LOTV because of the relationships they had with other units. Engaging into bio supported by 6 libs has the feeling of engaging into a 3 colossus army without marauders or vikings
They do, it does, and yeah. But I wasn't talking about any of that : )
Anyway, haven't got to watch all of RedBull Archon Finals yet, but I'm expecting this thread will blow up with examples of the imba Liberator!
A singular Liberator was built, and it was a proxy Starport rush, and it was versus Protoss. When a unit or strategy if obviously broken, you tend to see it quite often. Like the Adept, for instance.
p.s. you should really spoiler tag your response, Cheddar : /
Without Liberator there actually just now way for teran bio to handle Ultra 8 armor, and even with liberator if the zerg go Ultra corrup you cant win too, if you siege the libe for the ultra corupteur just crush the liberator and if you dont siege you just get rekt by Ultralisk.
But why is guaranteed damage all of the sudden a bad thing? If I walk into Colossus range, when Protoss wants a fight, I'm taking guaranteed damage. But it can also be a deterrent.
Colossi cost a lot in resources, take longer to build and need a 400/400 building+research that takes forever so if you're opening colossi vs bio, that's pretty much all you're doing. Colossi were also nerfed to unusability in LOTV because of the relationships they had with other units. Engaging into bio supported by 6 libs has the feeling of engaging into a 3 colossus army without marauders or vikings
They do, it does, and yeah. But I wasn't talking about any of that : )
Anyway, haven't got to watch all of RedBull Archon Finals yet, but I'm expecting this thread will blow up with examples of the imba Liberator!
A singular Liberator was built, and it was a proxy Starport rush, and it was versus Protoss. When a unit or strategy if obviously broken, you tend to see it quite often. Like the Adept, for instance.
p.s. you should really spoiler tag your response, Cheddar : /
that it was not a good idea to rush to liberators. MMA/Bomber still won that game, IIRC.
New patch, yes. It's about a 90-second-ish rush nerf (on paper), and a minor cost nerf. Though this can be looked at in a few ways. Travel time, etc ...
Incidentally, you remembered incorrectly, and so did I. It was Violet and Masa that proxied the Liberator. And, they lost exactly like you'd expect. Protoss casually built a single-unit doomdrop machine that grants 6-range blink to all nearby ground units. They plopped in some Adepts, and that was all she wrote. When the Liberator showed up, they built a VR and pushed it away taking very little damage. The Terran was utterly stomped into the ground. Literally, we saw a two-base Protoss warp prism adept attack into immortal / void ray with double forge for good measure. It was lulz.
It matters little though, what happened in that game, because many of the complaints listed here hinge on Liberators included in bio compositions. + Show Spoiler +
Of which we saw exactly none in the Archon grand finals. Seems awfully pretentious to write it off as unprepared professionals, when comparing it to casual beta testing by amateurs. Not saying the Liberator is completely fine, of course. Just saying that it's clearly not broken. Like the Adept. Like the Warp prism.
How where the Terran players prepared, when they were hell bent on ending the games early? Everybody knows that that is NOT what you need to do in LotV against Protoss. On the contrary, you have to play like Protoss does in HotS, because the roles are reversed now. As Terran you have to keep defending until you get your strong late game army ready.
What we saw during Redbull was not Adept or WP being OP, but rather what happens when you play against the metagame.
It is as though Terrans were doing a mass reaper strat in HotS and then arguing that Zerg is OP, because it didn't work.
How where the Terran players prepared, when they were hell bent on ending the games early? Everybody knows that that is NOT what you need to do in LotV against Protoss. On the contrary, you have to play like Protoss does in HotS, because the roles are reversed now. As Terran you have to keep defending until you get your strong late game army ready.
What we saw during Redbull was not Adept or WP being OP, but rather what happens when you play against the metagame.
It is as though Terrans were doing a mass reaper strat in HotS and then arguing that Zerg is OP, because it didn't work.
Discussing the Adept and WP in any more detail, I think, would be to venture outside of the scope of this thread (the Adept will undoubtedly get a just-Nerfing in the next balance patch). + Show Spoiler +
The latest patch corresponded with the RedBull Archon Grand Finals. Lots of TvZ and lots of TvP and one Liberator to go around. Not saying this settles the argument, but it certainly punctuates it.
Anyway, moving on. We'll see if the Liberator is a point of contention in the next community update / balance patch (it shouldn't be, imo).
Of which we saw exactly none in the Archon grand finals
I have no idea why some of the terrans in top 4 were only playing HOTS-style but there's plenty of examples of these compositions and their power on the pro ladder streams (incidentally, the streams of the players who won that tournament)
In another thread there's a guy being pretty crazy about a certain 1base "unstoppable unless you get lucky" adept all in that was never seen in redbull either
Of which we saw exactly none in the Archon grand finals
In another thread there's a guy being pretty crazy about a certain 1base "unstoppable unless you get lucky" adept all in that was never seen in redbull either
Holy cow, man, I open up this thread and find this post. I'm laughing my ass off.
Not only do you insist on claiming I'm talking about a 1 base build in that other thread, you say it here too? Why do you think I'm talking about a 1 base build? Why, do you keep saying it? And in another thread, a TvZ thread no less! At this point that's all I want to know. I don't care about the build, or the debate, or anything else, I just want to hear the chain of reasoning that brought you to the conclusion that I was talking about a build on 1 base.
I apologize for any pain or suffering you or your loved ones have ever felt whether or not it was my fault and will sacrifice a goat daily at an alter to bring you good fortune if you'll merely tell me why you keep claiming this! If your explanation is detailed, sincere, and logical, I'll even donate to your favorite charity (provided it isn't something weird and objectionable).
On September 22 2015 08:14 Bohemond wrote: The 4gate robo build in question is done on 2 base
Please, take note of the time stamps.
EDIT: Seriously, if you give an honest answer taking into account the facts, 100 USD to the cause of your choice.
On September 22 2015 20:52 wjat wrote: Blah Blah "Liberator IMBA"...
What about the Warp Prism?? It's the most broken unit in the game at the moment...
That is debatable. There is also the Adept and the Viper with PB to consider, not to mention carriers.
What I do not get is that they nerf the Liberator and you still have people crying that the Liberator is imbalanced. Protoss players have enjoyed dominance throughout the entirety of 2015 (premier and major tournaments) and they are trying to ensure that this remains true.
Time to close this thread, if you are still unable to handle liberators it's not the game's balance that is to blame.
On September 22 2015 20:52 wjat wrote: Blah Blah "Liberator IMBA"...
What about the Warp Prism?? It's the most broken unit in the game at the moment...
Well, the "most broken units" in the game are the workers and the overlord. And then the next "most broken" unit is probably the queen. And then there is the mothershipcore that is probably equally "broken". And also there are certain buildings that are "superbroken", like basically every one of them that produces a unit or generates supply.
And from what I'm getting, blizzard is basically trying to make the warp prism a bit like some of those above: a semi-necessary unit, by making it so broken that you cannot pass on it or you won't have offensive warp-ins. Similar to how you cannot pass on queens, or you don't have cheap larva production or how you cannot pass on medivacs, because they synergize strongly with nearly everything, so you should never build a terran army without some of them.
That's a design choice of blizzard: For various reasons they want to have "core units", hence units that are plainly much stronger than others and therefore "core" for your race. There is no choice in building certain stuff, it's plainly necessary to rely on those tools. Coming back to the liberator, I don't think blizzard wants it to have such a core role.
Of which we saw exactly none in the Archon grand finals
I have no idea why some of the terrans in top 4 were only playing HOTS-style but there's plenty of examples of these compositions and their power on the pro ladder streams (incidentally, the streams of the players who won that tournament)
In another thread there's a guy being pretty crazy about a certain 1base "unstoppable unless you get lucky" adept all in that was never seen in redbull either
It was bizarre to watch, really.
The Liberator rush was nerfed, which directly affected the timing and the resource commitment. It appears that Protoss might have a slightly difficult time engaging into a prepared Terran in the mid game, and this might need some attention, but Protoss is so incredibly strong in the other stages of the game--namely, early game and late game--that I don't really see it as an issue that Terran has a small timing window to maybe do some damage if the Protoss makes a mistake.
Of which we saw exactly none in the Archon grand finals
I have no idea why some of the terrans in top 4 were only playing HOTS-style but there's plenty of examples of these compositions and their power on the pro ladder streams (incidentally, the streams of the players who won that tournament)
In another thread there's a guy being pretty crazy about a certain 1base "unstoppable unless you get lucky" adept all in that was never seen in redbull either
It was bizarre to watch, really.
The Liberator rush was nerfed, which directly affected the timing and the resource commitment. It appears that Protoss might have a slightly difficult time engaging into a prepared Terran in the mid game, and this might need some attention, but Protoss is so incredibly strong in the other stages of the game--namely, early game and late game--that I don't really see it as an issue that Terran has a small timing window to maybe do some damage if the Protoss makes a mistake.
TimeSpiral no need to understate Terran power after the early game. T is simply stronger in mid and late game than Protoss. And Carriers, which you can't survive long enough to get in sufficient numbers vs a competent Terran, don't change that. It is not "slightly" but rather very difficult to engage into a prepared Terran in mid game and the timing window is huge. The only thing preventing obvious T domination is the right now very powerful Adept, which either kills T outright or does enough damage to allow P to get into the mid game comfortably. We will see just how strong Liberators are, after the Adept has been nerfed.
Of which we saw exactly none in the Archon grand finals
I have no idea why some of the terrans in top 4 were only playing HOTS-style but there's plenty of examples of these compositions and their power on the pro ladder streams (incidentally, the streams of the players who won that tournament)
In another thread there's a guy being pretty crazy about a certain 1base "unstoppable unless you get lucky" adept all in that was never seen in redbull either
It was bizarre to watch, really.
The Liberator rush was nerfed, which directly affected the timing and the resource commitment. It appears that Protoss might have a slightly difficult time engaging into a prepared Terran in the mid game, and this might need some attention, but Protoss is so incredibly strong in the other stages of the game--namely, early game and late game--that I don't really see it as an issue that Terran has a small timing window to maybe do some damage if the Protoss makes a mistake.
T is simply stronger in mid and late game than Protoss.
Terran has a window in the midgame, particularly during the "drop phase" of the match-up. In HotS, for a period in the meta, there was an anti-colossus timing where Terran could "pull the boys" and punish a greedy Toss. This is all well known. I don't even know if that mid-gaming timing for Terran truly exists in the current LotV meta, unless the Protoss just chooses to not abuse Terran's weak early game.
On the late-game bit: I doubt many of your Protoss brethren here on TL would agree with you that Terran is stronger than Protoss in the late game. I didn't even think it was controversial to claim such a thing.
Waiting for the next high-level LotV tournament, so we can see all these imba Liberators in action ; )
Terran has a window in the midgame, particularly during the "drop phase" of the match-up
Am less scared of drops than in HOTS (due to adepts, zealot buff, new overcharge being stronger and generally having more gateways rather than rushing tech against terran, playing phoenix more often to shut down starport play against worse players before it truly begins etc).
it's the >100 supply period where money is still limited that seems hard. There's quite a lot of poking around like walk forward and kill his 4'th and liberators are very good for their cost at that so people build them
On the late-game bit: I doubt many of your Protoss brethren here on TL would agree with you that Terran is stronger than Protoss in the late game. I didn't even think it was controversial to claim such a thing.
In WOL-HOTS, hell no. LOTV is a lot different, i really don't know about max fights (game changes a lot when you can throw away units and rebuild your composition with more of an emphasis on effectiveness in a fight instead of availability to attack/defend) but i know a lot of high level protosses are struggling against those army comps in the midgame, including the ones that won redbull
Protoss players have enjoyed dominance throughout the entirety of 2015 (premier and major tournaments) and they are trying to ensure that this remains true.
Stop with the obsession with with race is dominant. If there's anything that hasn't changed about this game it's the amount of people following everyone around to talk of racial bias and how they can't possibly have any motivation aside from wanting a specific race to dominate the pro scene. It happens for literally all races unless one of them is doing badly enough to make news headlines for long periods of time, stop it. As always this has always been at least partially a design discussion since it's not locked in yet
Terran has a window in the midgame, particularly during the "drop phase" of the match-up
Am less scared of drops than in HOTS (due to adepts, zealot buff, new overcharge being stronger and generally having more gateways rather than rushing tech against terran, playing phoenix more often to shut down starport play against worse players before it truly begins etc).
it's the >100 supply period where money is still limited that seems hard. There's quite a lot of poking around like walk forward and kill his 4'th and liberators are very good for their cost at that so people build them
On the late-game bit: I doubt many of your Protoss brethren here on TL would agree with you that Terran is stronger than Protoss in the late game. I didn't even think it was controversial to claim such a thing.
In WOL-HOTS, hell no. LOTV is a lot different, i really don't know about max fights (game changes a lot when you can throw away units and rebuild your composition with more of an emphasis on effectiveness in a fight instead of availability to attack/defend) but i know a lot of high level protosses are struggling against those army comps in the midgame, including the ones that won redbull
Hmm. I really didn't think you'd push back on that. Just to be clear, are you saying late-game Terran is stronger than late-game Protoss (in general terms)?
Cuz it really does feel like Protoss getting to Carrier + [ANYTHING (usually zealot archon, or maybe colossus if they're trollishly better)] is a win condition in TvP. Everything sucks versus interceptors. Liberators splash doesn't kill them fast enough. Thor does slightly better against Interceptors because of armor and tanky HP, but still not enough. Anything out of the barracks is obviously lolrly. Widow Mines will crush Interceptors, with the very real problems that (a) they can't fucking move (<-- kinda a big one), and (b) since interceptors are directly overhead your army, the friendly-fire damage is not worth it. You just lose everything. Vikings are obviously bad.
Is the answer really Battlecruisers with full energy and Yamato cannon?
Generally, it feels like Terran "getting to" Thor or Battlecruiser is more like, "Oh shit, this guy built Battlecruisers. Hahahaha! He must not know ..."
Zealot/Archon/Storm+robo or stargate is obviously super-duper strong in late-game scenarios. Stronger than Ghost Bio Medivac, but maybe not stronger than Ghost Bio Liberator?
I'm new to Void. Will someone that isn't silver please tell me how massing liberators isn't an option vs zerg? I recently had a 40 minute game where we almost mined out the map.
I maxed, albeit slowly, a ling/ultra army and destroyed most of his base, but he just relocated and with so many liberators, there didn't seem to be anything I could do. I made corruptors, vipers, even hydras, but nothing seemed to work. Once he had enough, I couldn't even avoid them anymore.
I'm not asking for complicated gameplay advice. I'm just wondering how I should think of this unit.
For instance, way back in WoL, I used to have trouble with phoenix openers until I realized I should just be counter-attacking instead of defending. What's the weakness of this unit?
On September 24 2015 11:25 danl9rm wrote: I'm new to Void. Will someone that isn't silver please tell me how massing liberators isn't an option vs zerg? I recently had a 40 minute game where we almost mined out the map.
I maxed, albeit slowly, a ling/ultra army and destroyed most of his base, but he just relocated and with so many liberators, there didn't seem to be anything I could do. I made corruptors, vipers, even hydras, but nothing seemed to work. Once he had enough, I couldn't even avoid them anymore.
I'm not asking for complicated gameplay advice. I'm just wondering how I should think of this unit.
For instance, way back in WoL, I used to have trouble with phoenix openers until I realized I should just be counter-attacking instead of defending. What's the weakness of this unit?
Thanks guys
Diamond Z here. Only half decent antiair that zerg got is Parasitic Bomb. So if they're turtling, take 4-5 bases as you start teching to hive as soon as possible. You can also take a nap while waiting in those "exciting" turtle games that mechers and blizzard love. Make 5 or more Vipers, use consume to get them to full energy while making 15 or more corruptors to give them cover. When done, you use the corruptors as meatshield and try to get all his units under Parasitic Bombs. You wanna cast them as soon as you can tho, cause your stuff will die fast. That should kill all his ships tho, since mechers can't micro.
Terran has a window in the midgame, particularly during the "drop phase" of the match-up
Am less scared of drops than in HOTS (due to adepts, zealot buff, new overcharge being stronger and generally having more gateways rather than rushing tech against terran, playing phoenix more often to shut down starport play against worse players before it truly begins etc).
it's the >100 supply period where money is still limited that seems hard. There's quite a lot of poking around like walk forward and kill his 4'th and liberators are very good for their cost at that so people build them
On the late-game bit: I doubt many of your Protoss brethren here on TL would agree with you that Terran is stronger than Protoss in the late game. I didn't even think it was controversial to claim such a thing.
In WOL-HOTS, hell no. LOTV is a lot different, i really don't know about max fights (game changes a lot when you can throw away units and rebuild your composition with more of an emphasis on effectiveness in a fight instead of availability to attack/defend) but i know a lot of high level protosses are struggling against those army comps in the midgame, including the ones that won redbull
Hmm. I really didn't think you'd push back on that. Just to be clear, are you saying late-game Terran is stronger than late-game Protoss (in general terms)?
Cuz it really does feel like Protoss getting to Carrier + [ANYTHING (usually zealot archon, or maybe colossus if they're trollishly better)] is a win condition in TvP. Everything sucks versus interceptors. Liberators splash doesn't kill them fast enough. Thor does slightly better against Interceptors because of armor and tanky HP, but still not enough. Anything out of the barracks is obviously lolrly. Widow Mines will crush Interceptors, with the very real problems that (a) they can't fucking move (<-- kinda a big one), and (b) since interceptors are directly overhead your army, the friendly-fire damage is not worth it. You just lose everything. Vikings are obviously bad.
Is the answer really Battlecruisers with full energy and Yamato cannon?
Generally, it feels like Terran "getting to" Thor or Battlecruiser is more like, "Oh shit, this guy built Battlecruisers. Hahahaha! He must not know ..."
Zealot/Archon/Storm+robo or stargate is obviously super-duper strong in late-game scenarios. Stronger than Ghost Bio Medivac, but maybe not stronger than Ghost Bio Liberator?
I think getting to a large amount of carriers without dying is an insanely difficult thing to do. Rushing to carriers in PvT is fairly terrible, from what i've seen from terran LotV streams, you just basically kill them if they do that. Transitioning to them is a huge resource cost that makes you extremely vulnerable, not to mention they have a massive build time that is arguably worsened by the new chronoboost. Not saying carriers aren't strong, but at least at the moment I don't consider it to be a reliable viable late time composition. Interceptors cost a lost of money and LotV is very different to HotS, it's a lot harder to sit there and build a bank to afford them when your bases are running out so quick, (and maxing out in general seems relatively uncommon in LotV compared to HotS).
So i consider late game to be similar to mid game in terms of composition, but slightly more well rounded, e.g.. a terran army of ghost bio liberator. I'd say this army atm is definitely stronger than anything protoss can build (not including carriers for the reasons above). In HotS, the protoss composition was so strong because it could include colossi and storm. In LotV, that former is now irrelevant. That leaves just storm, and I don't think any terrans would complain much about a pure storm army. Considering that protoss lost one of its most important units in the matchup, while terran gained an important unit, it's not hard to see why protoss has the short end of the stick past the early game, especially since adepts scale so poorly with upgrades. Now, a week ago i would've said disruptors are completely useless in PvT and have zero place in the matchup. After playing over 100 games this week and watching streams for hours, I actually think disruptors could potentially have some sort of place in PvT that might even out the scales a bit, but I've yet to see that in action so it's just pure speculation at this point.
Of course, all these things could definitely change in the next couple months, given that this is a beta. Unfortunately the mid-late game of TvP is very unexplored atm due to adepts sort of just ending the game before it gets there atm. Once adepts get nerfed somehow, it'll be easier to understand how the matchup works in this game. But i think at least at the moment, terran has some advantage past the early stages of the game, although we might have to wait a week or two to actually see that.
Hmm. I really didn't think you'd push back on that. Just to be clear, are you saying late-game Terran is stronger than late-game Protoss (in general terms)?
I'm saying that T does much better than they used to and protoss struggles in games between the early game and the point where you both have 10k/10k banked and the freedom to build literally anything. Never been in one of those last situations yet
Hmm. I really didn't think you'd push back on that. Just to be clear, are you saying late-game Terran is stronger than late-game Protoss (in general terms)?
I'm saying that T does much better than they used to and protoss struggles in games between the early game and the point where you both have 10k/10k banked and the freedom to build literally anything. Never been in one of those last situations yet
... because of the Liberator?
And the gap between early game and 10k/10k banks is pretty lol. I consider late-game to be 3/3 upgrades, Hive, Storm / Fleet Beacon, etc ... 10k banks are so incredibly rare in LotV, in my experience, and in the experiences I've had with spectating pro matches. I would call that something like Ultra Late Game.
(We're not running for office, brother. You don't have to be so guarded with your words.)
(We're not running for office, brother. You don't have to be so guarded with your words.)
People take offense very easily when talking about game balance/design!
liberator is part of the reason, it's just quite hard to fight bio in decently sized blobs with medivacs and ghosts available - adepts don't really work any more. I was just looking over some of my replays and there's a few pretty funny stalemates where everything gets EMP'd, disruptors blow up half of terrans units and then almost nothing dies in the next 20 seconds of the battle because it's marauders with a few ghosts under some medivacs shooting at adepts
I really hope they nerf it so that you don't HAVE TO invest in RW every game and invest into 4 ravagers every game when you want to play without roaches etc. Spores+queens should be enough.
I don't think spores+queens should be a catch-all defense but the same thing affects protoss as nothing can reach them unless it's built out of a stargate and that's a little odd
On September 15 2015 06:46 GGzerG wrote: People saying that the answer to Terran liberators being absolutely broken vs Zerg are Vipers and Brood lords are clearly playing this game at such a low level, a spell caster at Hive tech and T3 Tech cannot be the logical answer to being completely unable to correctly ingage due to Liberators, also if Terran has 10 Liberators with his composition and has them split out with a nice number of Vikings, what is the answer then? Parasitic bomb all day, go back consume, do it again, and hope you win?
Please.....
The low level analysis and Terran players defending liberators is funny, also saying Roach Ravager Hydra is the answer to mech is also silly.
Tank + Liberator outscales and outranges ravagers so easily, throw a few banshees in the mix in the early game before hydras are there and it is even easier. All Terran has to do is micro decent and not get hit by Corrosive bile, there is no way for Zerg to properly engage.
Every Terran player that thinks Zerg can easily tech up to Parasitic Bomb and that is the answer to everything, you clearly know nothing about this game and are playing at a really low level.
Well you do realise that he was talking about a HotS game don't you? There are a lot of imbalances at the moment and it will release unbalanced due to the 10th November release date.
The 13 range Ravager is not an answer to siege tanks and Liberators? The Liberator needing a TL for an AG upgrade is not an answer to slowing the number of Liberators you will face? Blizzard is dealing with it - are you saying you want even more?
13 Range Ravager is NOT the answer for SIEGE TANKS & Liberators, Do you think you can just mass a bunch of 13 range Ravagers, and take out a tank line / liberator line with ease? Please do post replays of this happening, thanks.
No, I think that you probably have to build some other units too, you know it's a composition that you should aim for.
Seems that Blizz agree, 13 range counters Mech as some of us said so they are removing this ill advised upgrade. I am very grateful for DKs acknowledgement of this as mech was ridiculously bad against ravagers with 13 range if the Z was good.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/iw9Zi0X.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/GcSDFZM.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/mP35sHd.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/WAUA3rU.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/R2hgmE5.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/aKJjYkM.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/0I5qZ62.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ciTFTRY.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Rv6WOch.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/A2Hw3Tt.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/kd5YzU4.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/osXCdBT.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/L4VgrwG.png)
