EPTPls don't ever buff Colossi back to its current stat in HotS
It does like 20% less damage than HOTS still.. It was irrelevent at range 8. Either buff it or just remove it and balance game around stronger gateway units, templar and reavers
Community Feedback Update - August 21 - Page 6
| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
It does like 20% less damage than HOTS still.. It was irrelevent at range 8. Either buff it or just remove it and balance game around stronger gateway units, templar and reavers | ||
|
SetGuitarsToKill
Canada28396 Posts
I saw a lot of people on Reddit sarcastically suggest it. I guess Blizzard isn't good with jokes. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9362 Posts
Also remember that you are investing a lot of ressources into planetary. It costs more than OC and you can still use OC for supply calldowns in the early game (or just keep it at cc for a while). | ||
|
Parcelleus
Australia1662 Posts
-especially appreciate fixing Colossus so it is actually a AoE option again. | ||
|
hitpoint
United States1511 Posts
We want the mothership core removed, not buffed. The siege tank absolutely does not need more counters. 13 range ravager is a terrible idea. Another autocast ability for a unit? Their internal testers sound awful. Guys, I don't even know anymore. | ||
|
xtorn
4060 Posts
On August 22 2015 07:56 TheWinks wrote: Almost all the posts about this were sarcastic in response to the concept of auto inject. Someone in the feedback chain made a mistake. that would be so priceless, if they took sarcasm seriously it just shows they recognize the game should be better at this point, and they are willing to test pretty much anything; now is probably the best time to come up with radical ideas also, they mentioned in this update a shoutout to koreans who dont complain but rather find solutions; if the koreans are so creative, maybe they should contact the top teamhouses and gather a bunch of input and test it, and be more selective with reddit | ||
|
Quineotio
Australia128 Posts
On August 22 2015 02:55 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Scouting is a critical component of StarCraft II, and we want to increase its importance in Legacy of the Void. This is a concerning point of view to have. Yes scouting should be important, but losing because you couldn't scout what your opponent is doing is stupid. I mean, you scout your opponent last on a 4 player map - should you lose for that? Starcraft 2 is too complex and interesting a game for it to be decided by random chance, depending on what build orders people use. During beta tests, small groups of players often arrive at conclusions concerning a topic and, even though their assertion may no longer be the case, they just can’t let go. We encourage everyone to be more open minded in actually discussing and testing changes during this beta so that we can work towards having the best possible StarCraft II. While this is true for players, it's also true for developers. Mothership Core Photon Overcharge We’ve been exploring a change to how this ability works based on your suggestions. Our current change is for the ability costs less, to only be cast on Pylons, and to no longer have siege range. We’re seeing a lot more interaction with this ability use due to this change, because now there are lots of decisions to be made on both sides. The offensive use of overcharge might be interesting... Colossus We heard your feedback that the Colossus nerf was too much, and regarding Colossi having a more general role like they do in Heart of the Swarm. We’ve been testing Colossus in combination with Disruptors and the results are cool so far. We started playtesting with their upgraded range back to 9, and the combination of the redesigned Disruptors supported by Colossi looks to be going well. The range is but one of many things that can be changed on the colossus. Please don't focus only on one area. How about a movement speed change? How about a rate of fire change? How about changing the build time? Seems like they don't know what they're trying to do with this unit. Adept We agree that early game Adepts can be a bit too powerful, and we would like to see a greater variety in Protoss army compositions. We have been trying various suggestions internally, and are leaning towards changing their cost from 100/25 to 75/50. This will slow down how many Adepts can be massed early on, and in the later stages of the game, it’ll be more of a commitment when going heavy Adepts. Another benefit that we’re seeing in the late game is that the army composition becomes more diverse due to the minerals-to-gas ratio. We will continue reviewing this internally and hopefully get it out to the beta if testing continues to go well. Adepts are too tough. Zealots are the tanking unit for protoss (which is why they feel like they've lost their role). Adepts should be much weaker, but do more damage. Zealots can tank, sentries can protect. If you want more tanking, build zealots. If you want more protection, build sentries. If you want more damage, build adepts. Ravager Upgrade We’re playing around with a new Ravager upgrade internally that increases the cast range of Corrosive Bile from 9 to 13. The idea here is to have a stronger counter to Siege Tank and entice Terran players to use different unit compositions depending on how the Zerg is playing. For example, if Zerg is going heavy Hydra/Lurkers, units like Liberators or Siege Tanks would be stronger, whereas if Zerg is going heavy Roach/Ravagers, Siege Tanks or Liberators might not be as strong as other units such as Cyclones or speed-upgraded Banshees. Zerg already have counters to the siege tank (vipers). They want to change siege tanks into useless units again? I guess get a couple of tanks early for siege tank drop harass then never again? Because that's what I think about when I think of siege tanks - mobile drop harass units. Further Learnings From Internal Testing
When trying out this change, we determined that reducing the workers needed per base isn’t good for the game because many of the coolest moments in StarCraft II come from worker harassment. With fewer workers, it was just too easy to rebuild after taking economic damage, making these moments less meaningful. If by coolest moments you mean workers getting killed by OP harassment units that force players to keep the majority of their army at home to defend, then sure. My take on it is that super powerful harassment combined with the need to build 60+ workers is the primary cause of death-ball play, because both these things cause players to be passive/defensive. With less need to build workers (and if harass wasn't as strong), people could build army units earlier and move them out on the map. Also, how does having more workers make losing workers more meaningful? If you have 60 workers and lose 5, isn't that less of a big deal than if you have 40 and you lose 5? The less workers you have, the larger percentage of your income you lose when one dies. If they still want to make losing workers more "meaningful", they can make them take longer to build, but I don't see this as a problem and don't understand their logic. We also looked into feedback suggesting we reduce the efficiency of workers when more than 1 is mining at a single mineral patch. This was aimed at making expanding result in a higher income more often than not, even when on an equal worker count. What we found is that expanding quickly and often already feels like a big advantage in Void, so this change does not feel all that different in terms of when you want to expand. Also, when you do expand faster and have your workers more spread out, it’s easier to replenish workers that you’ve lost to harassment. As we stated above, this is the opposite of what we’re looking to accomplish with the economy changes. What people don't like is that you are forced to expand in LotV, rather than it being an optional strategy. What you are essentially saying is that you agree that reducing the efficiency of workers will bring about the result you want, but you won't do it because you've come up with another way to do it (that nobody seems to like). How about you try reducing mining efficiency and revert mineral patches back to how they are in HotS? | ||
|
chipmonklord17
United States11944 Posts
That's why we increased the starting worker count from 6 to get rid of all of those strategically viable openers in Swarm. And who the fuck wants swarm host to be different in HotS? There's already a solution that works perfectly fine in LotV and that's splitting upgrades and parasitic bomb. Why continue to retweak the swarm host? The solution to the swarm host in HotS was to simply put in the SH from LotV, so why can't the solution to ZvMech be implement the solutions from Lotv? It just seems ridiculous. Although I must say I like the colossus change to make them possibly relevant again and the ravager idea sounds interesting. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
Why continue to retweak the swarm host? Because it's pretty bad or at least awkward to use | ||
|
chipmonklord17
United States11944 Posts
On August 22 2015 10:08 Cyro wrote: Because it's pretty bad or at least awkward to use But heart of the swarm is on its way out, there is an ALREADY DONE balance to ZvMech. I could understand if this were lotv but these problems aren't in legacy, Blizzard can't just put the retweaked HotS SH in LotV. Even if that's all they did the first time EDIT: I should add that I'd love the SH to be fixed, but it doesn't make sense to try and tweak numbers and balance specifically for ZvMech when theres already a present solution. It just feels like by the time they figure out the proper numbers HotS will be irrelevant. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
| ||
|
Antonidas
United States105 Posts
On August 22 2015 09:42 xtorn wrote: that would be so priceless, if they took sarcasm seriously it just shows they recognize the game should be better at this point, and they are willing to test pretty much anything; now is probably the best time to come up with radical ideas also, they mentioned in this update a shoutout to koreans who dont complain but rather find solutions; if the koreans are so creative, maybe they should contact the top teamhouses and gather a bunch of input and test it, and be more selective with reddit they have always strived to improve the game....... | ||
|
chipmonklord17
United States11944 Posts
On August 22 2015 10:16 Cyro wrote: Eh, 6 months is a long time. As far as Blizzard is concerned HotS is irrelevant after WCS championships, which should be at Blizzcon which is the first weekend in November. | ||
|
Jaedrik
113 Posts
So, naturally, I don't like that they're using it as reason not to do some macro changes that I think would be funner. :D | ||
|
FaiFai
Peru53 Posts
On August 22 2015 09:50 Quineotio wrote: Zerg already have counters to the siege tank (vipers). They want to change siege tanks into useless units again? I guess get a couple of tanks early for siege tank drop harass then never again? Because that's what I think about when I think of siege tanks - mobile drop harass units. So you say Zerg have a tier 3 unit (viper) to counter a tier 1 unit (tank). And that is "ok" for you?, pf, when i read that i figure out that these theory discussions are pointless, a waste of time, and doesn´t have an objective perspective. For me this is enough, i give up on these discussions. I know now why after in game are heavy balance problems. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
| ||
|
Antonidas
United States105 Posts
On August 22 2015 04:01 Charoisaur wrote: Lately DK is going full retard. removing macro mechanics, making everything easier, the terrible and unelegant warpin change, rebuffing the collossus... I had so much hope for LotV but with every community update I'm getting more and more disappointed. Why do you design such a phenomenal game like sc2 only to destroy it with its expansion??? it's a team effort. the expansion hasn't been released yet. You serve as a good example of people who come to conclusions with an unreasonable basis. I wouldn't be surprised if the auto build comment was a swipe at people like you. Perhaps, they were thinking to make the game more appealing to the masses by simplifying the game. Or had other reasons to try auto build. | ||
|
hitpoint
United States1511 Posts
On August 22 2015 10:33 FaiFai wrote: So you say Zerg have a tier 3 unit (viper) to counter a tier 1 unit (tank). And that is "ok" for you?, pf, when i read that i figure out that these theory discussions are pointless, a waste of time, and doesn´t have an objective perspective. For me this is enough, i give up on these discussions. I know now why after in game are heavy balance problems. It's fine with me. Why does the tank need a "counter" at all? It's slow and immobile, so that's it's weakness. Having so many hard counters in the game is a bad thing. | ||
|
Quineotio
Australia128 Posts
On August 22 2015 10:33 FaiFai wrote: So you say Zerg have a tier 3 unit (viper) to counter a tier 1 unit (tank). And that is "ok" for you?, pf, when i read that i figure out that these theory discussions are pointless, a waste of time, and doesn´t have an objective perspective. For me this is enough, i give up on these discussions. I know now why after in game are heavy balance problems. That's how it is in HotS and it seems to be working fine. The problem with siege tanks as zerg is not when the terran player has their first siege tank, but when they have lots of siege tanks. So it's ok that vipers are tier 3, because it's only at the later stage of the game that tanks become something that zerg need a specific counter to. Giving zerg a strong anti siege tank unit early in the game makes siege tanks useless in the early game (outside of drop harass). I actually think it's good game design to have the counter units come out later than the unit they counter. If a unit can be countered immediately, then why build it at all? Can you please explain to me why you think the change they have suggested to the ravager is a good thing? | ||
|
Quineotio
Australia128 Posts
On August 22 2015 10:12 chipmonklord17 wrote: But heart of the swarm is on its way out, there is an ALREADY DONE balance to ZvMech. I could understand if this were lotv but these problems aren't in legacy, Blizzard can't just put the retweaked HotS SH in LotV. Even if that's all they did the first time EDIT: I should add that I'd love the SH to be fixed, but it doesn't make sense to try and tweak numbers and balance specifically for ZvMech when theres already a present solution. It just feels like by the time they figure out the proper numbers HotS will be irrelevant. I agree with you. We've seen Byul beat Innovation, and Dark beat MMA recently, so it's not like mech is invincible. Yes, ideally mech would be tweaked, or zerg buffed, or something, but I'd rather they spent their time on LotV. LotV needs a LOT of work. | ||
| ||
