|
Here are the latest changes for the Legacy of the Void Beta.
Protoss
- Carrier health decreased from 300 to 250.
- Adept shields increased by 10.
Terran
- The delay before a Siege Tank in Siege Mode firing when being dropped by a Medivac has been increased from 0.53 to 1.43 seconds.
- Liberator
- Starts with Defender Mode enabled.
- Defender Mode range decreased to 5.
- Defender Mode upgrade now increases its range by 4.
- Upgrade requirement changed to Fusion Core.
Zerg
- Lurker Den morph time increased from 71 to 86 seconds.
Bug Fixes
- Fixed an issue that caused the Siege Tank to fire at the incorrect speed.
- Casting Mass Recall with the Mothership while moving should now be more responsive.
For more information about these changes, check out David Kim’s community update.
|
For those wanting to see these changes live the Olimoleague is going on right now, casted by BaseTradeTV featuring Solar, Byun, and a lot of other notable Korean players if you want to see how the changes actually play out in games. The DreamHack qualifiers today and tomorrow would also be good places to see people playing out the changes.
|
I like the liberator changes...?
|
Man, i'm fine with the liberator change, but, what's the point of decreasing the health of carriers (they still do the same damage and quite fast to even matter) or the increase to adept's shield (as if this Warhound 2.0 unit was struggling against fictive scenarios that only blizzard can conceive)
|
Forgot to mention, still no news about Parasitic bomb/8 armor ultralisk/invincible nydus ...
|
Parasitic bomb is quite necessary with current carriers; so if you change one, you have to change the other.
I am against the changes for the liberator; the range was not the problem, neither was it's mid game usage (both with are now nerfed.)
|
There has been news about the nydus lol
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
On October 24 2015 11:19 AdrianHealeyy wrote:
Parasitic bomb is quite necessary with current carriers; so if you change one, you have to change the other.
I am against the changes for the liberator; the range was not the problem, neither was it's mid game usage (both with are now nerfed.)
What would you consider the problem with liberator at the moment?
|
On October 24 2015 11:19 AdrianHealeyy wrote:
Parasitic bomb is quite necessary with current carriers; so if you change one, you have to change the other.
I am against the changes for the liberator; the range was not the problem, neither was it's mid game usage (both with are now nerfed.)
Good luck tickling carriers with parasitic bomb, probably you'll end up kitted to death.
Anyway, you fail to see the problem , Blizzard is trying to make the carrier unit work at all costs (I have no Idea why , maybe because this expansion is protoss related) and it doesn't scales up (with current zerg/terran units) no matter how hard they try, why do you think liberator was introduced ?! or parasitic bomb was added ? (both were supposed to be effective counters but in the end , less than 3 weeks till release there's a big freaking mess regarding all 3 races air units)
|
On October 24 2015 11:08 HomeWorld wrote:
Man, i'm fine with the liberator change, but, what's the point of decreasing the health of carriers (they still do the same damage and quite fast to even matter) or the increase to adept's shield (as if this Warhound 2.0 unit was struggling against fictive scenarios that only blizzard can conceive)
warhound 2.0? the unit is garbage man, wake up LOL
|
On October 24 2015 11:32 ROOTFayth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2015 11:08 HomeWorld wrote:
Man, i'm fine with the liberator change, but, what's the point of decreasing the health of carriers (they still do the same damage and quite fast to even matter) or the increase to adept's shield (as if this Warhound 2.0 unit was struggling against fictive scenarios that only blizzard can conceive) warhound 2.0? the unit is garbage man, wake up LOL
That's exactly what i'm saying, the unit (adept) is garbage and ready for recycling.
|
I can't believe TvZ ultras or parasitic bomb isn't being looked at. Alternatively ghost energy increase or snipe energy decrease would be nice
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
On October 24 2015 11:34 HomeWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2015 11:32 ROOTFayth wrote:On October 24 2015 11:08 HomeWorld wrote:
Man, i'm fine with the liberator change, but, what's the point of decreasing the health of carriers (they still do the same damage and quite fast to even matter) or the increase to adept's shield (as if this Warhound 2.0 unit was struggling against fictive scenarios that only blizzard can conceive) warhound 2.0? the unit is garbage man, wake up LOL That's exactly what i'm saying, the unit (adept) is garbage and ready for recycling.
Fayth is commenting on the balance, while you are bypassing that entirely and commenting on the design (which you subjectively do not like, but a lot of other people do like)
|
On October 24 2015 11:19 AdrianHealeyy wrote:
Parasitic bomb is quite necessary with current carriers; so if you change one, you have to change the other.
How does parasitic bomb deal with carriers? It doesn't pop interceptors anymore.
Zerg late game not even being talked about has me nervous.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
On October 24 2015 11:42 TheWinks wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2015 11:19 AdrianHealeyy wrote:
Parasitic bomb is quite necessary with current carriers; so if you change one, you have to change the other. How does parasitic bomb deal with carriers? It doesn't pop interceptors anymore.
It's generally good to have vipers in an anti-carrier army because of abduct and if you get to high energy, you can drop like 8 clouds and a few abducts from half a dozen vipers and it adds a lot of value for the supply cost
While abduct becomes less effective fighting lower supply, lower HP units, parasitic bomb becomes more effective so it's much harder for the protoss to effectively mix in units like void rays.
|
On October 24 2015 11:44 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2015 11:42 TheWinks wrote:On October 24 2015 11:19 AdrianHealeyy wrote:
Parasitic bomb is quite necessary with current carriers; so if you change one, you have to change the other. How does parasitic bomb deal with carriers? It doesn't pop interceptors anymore. It's generally good to have vipers in an anti-carrier army because of abduct and if you get to high energy, you can drop like 8 clouds and a few abducts from half a dozen vipers and it adds a lot of value for the supply cost While abduct becomes less effective fighting lower supply, lower HP units, parasitic bomb becomes more effective so it's much harder for the protoss to effectively mix in units like void rays.
Vipers are amazing units, but my post was about parasitic bomb and carriers. Changing parasitic bomb would not impact the relationship between that ability and carriers.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
I lost a few carrier armies to zergs who threw a ton of parasitic bombs (like 6-15 bombs at the same time) due to losing too much health before getting units split or having difficulty retreating cleanly so i see that it's not neccesarily that useful if units are controlled perfectly - but it forces the protoss to control well and in certain ways, just to then deal a decent chunk of damage anyway and it's a great deterrence to the usual "oh he's building corruptor/ultralisk - throw in a dozen void rays" response.
If you can mix in 12 hydralisks or 8 vipers, it's clear which you want IMO! If they were 5 or maybe even 4 supply i'd say nah, build a couple to try and get lucky abducts and leave it - but they're 3 supply units so it's useful when supply is a factor, even against carriers.
|
On October 24 2015 11:37 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2015 11:34 HomeWorld wrote:On October 24 2015 11:32 ROOTFayth wrote:On October 24 2015 11:08 HomeWorld wrote:
Man, i'm fine with the liberator change, but, what's the point of decreasing the health of carriers (they still do the same damage and quite fast to even matter) or the increase to adept's shield (as if this Warhound 2.0 unit was struggling against fictive scenarios that only blizzard can conceive) warhound 2.0? the unit is garbage man, wake up LOL That's exactly what i'm saying, the unit (adept) is garbage and ready for recycling. Fayth is commenting on the balance, while you are bypassing that entirely and commenting on the design (which you subjectively do not like, but a lot of other people do like)
For sure I fail to understand what you're trying to say (with a good reason, you're not making any sense). Probably this is just another meaningless post to bolster your post count (as usual)
User was warned for this post
|
Big changes to Terran, making me all grumbly. Grumble grumble grumble.
|
What is the new effective range of the Liberator? Or, what is the radius of its ability?
|
5, same as a Marine. The circle has 5 radius so the liberator is pretty much on top of it.
|
Moving the upgrade to require a fusion core seems unnecessary. If it's overpowered people will rush a fusion core just like with the medivac healing upgrade; If it's not overpowered, hiding it behind a tech lab and a fusion core is too much.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
On October 24 2015 12:08 ZAiNs wrote:
What is the new effective range of the Liberator? Or, what is the radius of its ability?
5(+4) and then the edge of the circle reaching up to X range further (not sure of the radius number, he said 5^. So further than siege tank when upgraded if that's correct (10 and 14 for the tip of the circle at max range)
-----
Moving the upgrade to require a fusion core seems unnecessary. If it's overpowered people will rush a fusion core just like with the medivac healing upgrade; If it's not overpowered, hiding it behind a tech lab and a fusion core is too much.
Blizzard is very bad with patch note wording recently; it's likely that it's not what you think - perhaps an upgrade on the fusion core itself, which would allow you to use them without the weird tech lab to reactor dance.
That wasn't done with medivacs (their starting energy upgrade wasn't worth losing the reactor) and it can't be done with units like the Banshee because they can't be reactored, however liberators are in the fairly unique position of being a reactor powerhouse unit that needed a tech lab upgrade for half of its function.
------
The delay before a Siege Tank in Siege Mode firing when being dropped by a Medivac has been increased from 0.53 to 1.43 seconds.
I quite like this, if neccesary they can even go further and make it 2-5 seconds to preserve the ability to move tanks without the awkward unsiege-wait-pickup-drop-siege dance that would occur if they removed the ability altogether.
That's an extension of the tank and medivac abilities, rather than an excuse to keep the tank weak and transform it into a bouncy fast long range harass unit.
|
yea im not buying this game.
|
The remove of the upgrade for the defendor mode is really big.
We are going to see even more liberator use.
Spores are still not enough to defend liberator harass so the zerg has to go fast roaches everytime in order to be able to make ravagers in time.
At least zergs player can now defend without doing a retarded 2 bases corruptor.
I didn't see people mention it but it is now the end of 2 base nydus play in ZvT.
|
I still think they should just remove vision from the liberator's targetting vision. It would take more micro from both sides to use and kill spotters, and you wouldn't be able to park them behind mineral lines anymore. It would make them constantly need support, as it should be.
As for lurker den nerfs, I don't think theyre nerfing the right thing, but I'm fine with it. They're hard to rush and make use of right away and seem to only be good when the game progresses. I still think they should have 165 hp, burrow slower and move slower off-creep only. This makes them harder to use aggressively, while keeping its zone-controlling abilities intact. This means that a lurker will be killed by 2 stalker shots after a disruptor shot, which is good.
Carrier is going to be the new DPS of the protoss army in the end game, and nerfing it's hp makes it always require constant support.
I think my suggestions in my personal change list are good, but alas I'm just a rookie and I might be an idiot. Its far too late for major changes either.
|
On October 24 2015 13:37 FireCake wrote:
The remove of the upgrade for the defendor mode is really big.
We are going to see even more liberator use.
Spores are still not enough to defend liberator harass so the zerg has to go fast roaches everytime in order to be able to make ravagers in time.
At least zergs player can now defend without doing a retarded 2 bases corruptor.
I didn't see people mention it but it is now the end of 2 base nydus play in ZvT.
Put spore behind mineral lines, not in mineral lines like you do vs banshee, No need for Ravagers.
Ravagers could be used with nydus and queens.
It worked before unless they have 3 liberators but if they have that then you miss scouting and you could have all in him with ling/bane
While Terran has some IMBA things
I still think Protoss is broken as fuck.
|
Seems like good changes for both ZvT and ZvP IMO! Thanks Blizzard.
|
On October 24 2015 13:43 Shinba wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2015 13:37 FireCake wrote:
The remove of the upgrade for the defendor mode is really big.
We are going to see even more liberator use.
Spores are still not enough to defend liberator harass so the zerg has to go fast roaches everytime in order to be able to make ravagers in time.
At least zergs player can now defend without doing a retarded 2 bases corruptor.
I didn't see people mention it but it is now the end of 2 base nydus play in ZvT. Put spore behind mineral lines, not in mineral lines like you do vs banshee, No need for Ravagers. Ravagers could be used with nydus and queens. It worked before unless they have 3 liberators but if they have that then you miss scouting and you could have all in him with ling/bane While Terran has some IMBA things I still think Protoss is broken as fuck.
1. You're talking to Firecake.
2. Protoss is doing the worst right now...
|
On October 24 2015 13:43 Shinba wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2015 13:37 FireCake wrote:
The remove of the upgrade for the defendor mode is really big.
We are going to see even more liberator use.
Spores are still not enough to defend liberator harass so the zerg has to go fast roaches everytime in order to be able to make ravagers in time.
At least zergs player can now defend without doing a retarded 2 bases corruptor.
I didn't see people mention it but it is now the end of 2 base nydus play in ZvT. Put spore behind mineral lines, not in mineral lines like you do vs banshee, No need for Ravagers.
One spore behind mineral line is not enough, zerg needs at least 3 spores behind every mineral line because the liberator needs to be in range of only one mineral to harass the whole mineral line.
On October 24 2015 13:43 Shinba wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2015 13:37 FireCake wrote:
The remove of the upgrade for the defendor mode is really big.
We are going to see even more liberator use.
Spores are still not enough to defend liberator harass so the zerg has to go fast roaches everytime in order to be able to make ravagers in time.
At least zergs player can now defend without doing a retarded 2 bases corruptor.
I didn't see people mention it but it is now the end of 2 base nydus play in ZvT. Ravagers could be used with nydus and queens. It worked before unless they have 3 liberators but if they have that then you miss scouting and you could have all in him with ling/bane
this comes way too late.
The terran player may even have enough firepower to kill the nydus before it gets heal
You should have a look of what is a 2 base nydus build because it seems that you have no idea of the timings of the build.
It's not possible to go for a 2 base nydus and then finally go for a ling/bane all in because a lucky scout shows that the terran is going liberator. Also, ling/bane all in don't punish liberators build.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
The terran player may even have enough firepower to kill the nydus before it gets heal
He may, but neither of you can count on it 100% because you have only have a couple of game ticks to kill the nydus if the zerg is as fast as possible. It's not random (at all) but it's highly volatile.
Take a look at this post from Snute - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/496682-nydus-worm-shouldnt-stay-like-that?page=8#155 - for an example of high level players abusing it in a real game (not neccesarily targetted at anyone in particular, just to have it in this thread)
The zerg was slower than neccesary. A fraction of a second but if it were to become an abusive possible thing in high level play after the game was out for a while, i'm sure people would practice it down to the millisecond
i am not very happy with how it was last patch - if it becomes a thing and blizzard wants zerg to have those options, a nydus with more health seems more fair and consistent than one that may or may not survive or get killed in 2 hits and decide a game if it gets through or not
|
on creep siege drops are rather useless now. it takes 2.6 times longer to fire the first shot. This destroys the whole point of tank drops
|
Liberators kiiiiiiiind of help out vs nydus play. they won't kill the worm and they will fall to the queens if they target it after transfusing, but they do help.
I find 2 base nydus all in is kind of build ordery. If terran opens with 4+ hellions then they lose. If not they have a chance.
It's pretty dumb.
|
On October 24 2015 15:24 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +The terran player may even have enough firepower to kill the nydus before it gets heal He may, but neither of you can count on it 100% because you have only have a couple of game ticks to kill the nydus if the zerg is as fast as possible. It's not random (at all) but it's highly volatile.
It is insanely random.
The RNG is pretty crazy in this game (for an "esport" game) and when you want to do precise micro it starts to matter a lot.
The attack speed of the units, casting time, how units walks and move on each other... all these things are random.
We could also add the lags since we still have very bad servers...
The replay of Snute is outdated.
On October 24 2015 15:42 BEARDiaguz wrote:
Liberators kiiiiiiiind of help out vs nydus play. they won't kill the worm and they will fall to the queens if they target it after transfusing, but they do help.
I find 2 base nydus all in is kind of build ordery. If terran opens with 4+ hellions then they lose. If not they have a chance.
It's pretty dumb.
Terrans don't lose because they make 4+ hellions, they lose because they are very greedy somewhere else, or don't control their units very well.
You can simply surround the nydus and queen with vcs while the liberators kill everything.
Problem solved, and almost no micro is required.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
The attack speed of the units, casting time, how units walks and move on each other... all these things are random.
We could also add the lags since we still have very bad servers...
It's not random but it behaves in a very calculated way that is hard to control or predict sometimes. Even with 20 ping to the server, you'll have about a 0.12 to 0.2 second delay on commands because of how the engine works; the input delay is also variable by a notable amount of time depending on sheer luck for when you clicked vs when the next game simulation tick happens
The replay of Snute is outdated
In what way? Maybe different units are changed now, liberator is different - but when a Nydus comes up, the situation will be very similar AFAIK. The game is only a week and a half old. Sure he could probably put a liberator or two now at like 12 range from the worm and oneshot it as it spawns, but Liberators do fairly obscene opening volley damage in that one situation - it doesn't excuse the worm in other situations
|
On October 24 2015 11:11 HomeWorld wrote:
Forgot to mention, still no news about Parasitic bomb/8 armor ultralisk/invincible nydus ...
Yea still waiting for this.......
|
On October 24 2015 15:36 Noonius wrote:
on creep siege drops are rather useless now. it takes 2.6 times longer to fire the first shot. This destroys the whole point of tank drops
agree with that
|
On October 24 2015 15:36 Noonius wrote:
on creep siege drops are rather useless now. it takes 2.6 times longer to fire the first shot. This destroys the whole point of tank drops
i think being unable to use tank drops offensively is a good change.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
on creep siege drops are rather useless now. it takes 2.6 times longer to fire the first shot. This destroys the whole point of tank drops
As long as you think of the purpose as sieged-tank repositioning, it's completely fine and almost all of that QOL and minor power upgrade is still there.
|
On October 24 2015 16:17 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +The attack speed of the units, casting time, how units walks and move on each other... all these things are random.
We could also add the lags since we still have very bad servers... It's not random but it behaves in a very calculated way that is hard to control or predict sometimes. Even with 20 ping to the server, you'll have about a 0.12 to 0.2 second delay on commands because of how the engine works; the input delay is also variable by a notable amount of time depending on sheer luck for when you clicked vs when the next game simulation tick happens
It is random since the same inputs don't produce the same outputs. (or there is something hidden i am missing ?)
If you don't believe me try it yourself, it takes few minutes on unit test map to see it.
On October 24 2015 16:17 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +The attack speed of the units, casting time, how units walks and move on each other... all these things are random.
We could also add the lags since we still have very bad servers... In what way? Maybe different units are changed now, liberator is different - but when a Nydus comes up, the situation will be very similar AFAIK. The game is only a week and a half old. Sure he could probably put a liberator or two now at like 12 range from the worm and oneshot it as it spawns, but Liberators do fairly obscene opening volley damage in that one situation - it doesn't excuse the worm in other situations
Liberators, you said it yourself, this unit destroy 2 base nydus.
Before the patch, a 2 base nydus hits before the upgrade of the liberators and thus punish a 3CC liberator build.
Now, liberators kills this opening.
What else the terran can do ?
Tank opening ? very good against nydus play
Hellbats push ? very good against nydus play
3 rax before factory ? very good against nydus play.
Nydus is still good against medivac push because they hit very late but terrans players prefer to play the others openings anyway. Nydus should be good against banshee opening too because the cloack upgrade should be a little bit late to defend the nydus but nobody plays banshee...
edit : woops 3 messages in a row ^^ is there a way to remove them ?
|
|
|
|
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
It is random since the same inputs don't produce the same outputs. (or there is something hidden i am missing ?)
I think the problem here is that the same inputs do produce the same outputs (the engine is fully deterministic, that's the basis for the whole multiplayer and replay system) - but it's difficult for the player to consistently give a precice input because of timing and highly inconsistent input lag of the engine. Also sometimes, small variations can have chaotic results. To add to that, there are also effects in the engine (like the scan range problem demonstrated here - + Show Spoiler + - fixed in LOTV beta) which have the potential to mess with the response to input - even though it's completely predictable from an engine point of view, it feels random to the player.
|
On October 24 2015 17:25 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +It is random since the same inputs don't produce the same outputs. (or there is something hidden i am missing ?) I think the problem here is that the same inputs do produce the same outputs ( the engine is fully deterministic, that's the basis for the whole multiplayer and replay system) - but it's difficult for the player to consistently give a precice input because of timing and highly inconsistent input lag of the engine. Also sometimes, small variations can have chaotic results. To add to that, there are also effects in the engine (like the scan range problem demonstrated here - + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxWYxysVBvI - fixed in LOTV beta) which have the potential to mess with the response to input - even though it's completely predictable from an engine point of view, it feels random to the player.
If the engine is fully deterministic then explains me these things :
-how do you predict creep spread ?
-if 2 melee units attack each other, let's say 2 zerglings, which one win ?
-when an scv build a building how do you predict on which side of the building the unit goes ?
-About the pathfinding, how do you know which path the units will take ? This thing has changed so many times, and still change, DK confirmed me they were going to change it again for LoTv (and obviously this kind of thing is never mentioned in patch notes...)
-The burrow/unburrow time of almost all (or all ?) units vary, how do you determine how many time a lurker (for example) will need to burrow ?
...
|
On October 24 2015 17:38 FireCake wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2015 17:25 Cyro wrote:It is random since the same inputs don't produce the same outputs. (or there is something hidden i am missing ?) I think the problem here is that the same inputs do produce the same outputs ( the engine is fully deterministic, that's the basis for the whole multiplayer and replay system) - but it's difficult for the player to consistently give a precice input because of timing and highly inconsistent input lag of the engine. Also sometimes, small variations can have chaotic results. To add to that, there are also effects in the engine (like the scan range problem demonstrated here - + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxWYxysVBvI - fixed in LOTV beta) which have the potential to mess with the response to input - even though it's completely predictable from an engine point of view, it feels random to the player. If the engine is fully deterministic then explains me these things : -how do you predict creep spread ? -if 2 melee units attack each other, let's say 2 zerglings, which one win ? -when an scv build a building how do you predict on which side of the building the unit goes ? -About the pathfinding, how do you know which path the units will take ? This thing has changed so many times, and still change, DK confirmed me they were going to change it again for LoTv (and obviously this kind of thing is never mentioned in patch notes...) -The burrow/unburrow time of almost all (or all ?) units vary, how do you determine how many time a lurker (for example) will need to burrow ? ...
Just because a human cant find these things out doesnt mean the engine is not deterministic. If it wasnt then the outcome of a 1 on 1 battle between 2 zerglings would change if you load the game or watch the replay. Actually, pretty much EVERYTHING a computer does is deterministic. The only things that can screw with this is bad programming of multi threaded applications.
|
On October 24 2015 17:38 FireCake wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2015 17:25 Cyro wrote:It is random since the same inputs don't produce the same outputs. (or there is something hidden i am missing ?) I think the problem here is that the same inputs do produce the same outputs ( the engine is fully deterministic, that's the basis for the whole multiplayer and replay system) - but it's difficult for the player to consistently give a precice input because of timing and highly inconsistent input lag of the engine. Also sometimes, small variations can have chaotic results. To add to that, there are also effects in the engine (like the scan range problem demonstrated here - + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxWYxysVBvI - fixed in LOTV beta) which have the potential to mess with the response to input - even though it's completely predictable from an engine point of view, it feels random to the player. If the engine is fully deterministic then explains me these things : -how do you predict creep spread ? -if 2 melee units attack each other, let's say 2 zerglings, which one win ? -when an scv build a building how do you predict on which side of the building the unit goes ? -About the pathfinding, how do you know which path the units will take ? This thing has changed so many times, and still change, DK confirmed me they were going to change it again for LoTv (and obviously this kind of thing is never mentioned in patch notes...) -The burrow/unburrow time of almost all (or all ?) units vary, how do you determine how many time a lurker (for example) will need to burrow ? ...
You are right in general that there are many small randomnesses + Show Spoiler +(is that how you say it? :D)
Not sure how creepspread works, but it's probably random too, true. Same probably for the SCV. Both of those things could actually follow a pattern, or a pattern of multiple possible ones (chosen randomly?), but at least they seem random.
About other things:
If two units attack each other, the "older" unit hits first, as far as I know. So basically, if you take one of your initial drones from the mineral line, it should beat a new built one due to that. This should also be true for abilities, e.g. two high templar feedbacking each other.
Pathfinding isn't random. But the exact engine blizzard uses is unknown to us (I think). If it works properly, the units should just take the shortest path, but I think there are some bugs with cliffwalkers like colossus and reaper that make them take the longer paths sometimes.
|
On October 24 2015 17:54 RoomOfMush wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2015 17:38 FireCake wrote:On October 24 2015 17:25 Cyro wrote:It is random since the same inputs don't produce the same outputs. (or there is something hidden i am missing ?) I think the problem here is that the same inputs do produce the same outputs ( the engine is fully deterministic, that's the basis for the whole multiplayer and replay system) - but it's difficult for the player to consistently give a precice input because of timing and highly inconsistent input lag of the engine. Also sometimes, small variations can have chaotic results. To add to that, there are also effects in the engine (like the scan range problem demonstrated here - + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxWYxysVBvI - fixed in LOTV beta) which have the potential to mess with the response to input - even though it's completely predictable from an engine point of view, it feels random to the player. If the engine is fully deterministic then explains me these things : -how do you predict creep spread ? -if 2 melee units attack each other, let's say 2 zerglings, which one win ? -when an scv build a building how do you predict on which side of the building the unit goes ? -About the pathfinding, how do you know which path the units will take ? This thing has changed so many times, and still change, DK confirmed me they were going to change it again for LoTv (and obviously this kind of thing is never mentioned in patch notes...) -The burrow/unburrow time of almost all (or all ?) units vary, how do you determine how many time a lurker (for example) will need to burrow ? ... Just because a human cant find these things out doesnt mean the engine is not deterministic. If it wasnt then the outcome of a 1 on 1 battle between 2 zerglings would change if you load the game or watch the replay. Actually, pretty much EVERYTHING a computer does is deterministic. The only things that can screw with this is bad programming of multi threaded applications.
This is wrong.
Its very easy to add some randomness in a game but still have the same actions everytime you load the game or watch the replay.
How ?
Simply use a seed, for example a number like the date at which the game has been played and use this number to "solve" every random things of the game.
This is used in many video games for decades.
Strictly speaking computers are not random (even multi threaded applications), but what i care, as a player, is to understand the game and to be able to predict what is going to happen.
After years of play i still have no clue how to predict all the things i mentioned earlier.
On October 24 2015 18:12 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2015 17:38 FireCake wrote:On October 24 2015 17:25 Cyro wrote:It is random since the same inputs don't produce the same outputs. (or there is something hidden i am missing ?) I think the problem here is that the same inputs do produce the same outputs ( the engine is fully deterministic, that's the basis for the whole multiplayer and replay system) - but it's difficult for the player to consistently give a precice input because of timing and highly inconsistent input lag of the engine. Also sometimes, small variations can have chaotic results. To add to that, there are also effects in the engine (like the scan range problem demonstrated here - + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxWYxysVBvI - fixed in LOTV beta) which have the potential to mess with the response to input - even though it's completely predictable from an engine point of view, it feels random to the player. If the engine is fully deterministic then explains me these things : -how do you predict creep spread ? -if 2 melee units attack each other, let's say 2 zerglings, which one win ? -when an scv build a building how do you predict on which side of the building the unit goes ? -About the pathfinding, how do you know which path the units will take ? This thing has changed so many times, and still change, DK confirmed me they were going to change it again for LoTv (and obviously this kind of thing is never mentioned in patch notes...) -The burrow/unburrow time of almost all (or all ?) units vary, how do you determine how many time a lurker (for example) will need to burrow ? ... You are right in general that there are many small randomnesses + Show Spoiler +(is that how you say it? :D) in the game. Some abilities have a "random delay" variable attached to it, but those things are very small. I found this out because I thout burrow felt inconsistent and went to the editor, and yes, though there is a set time it takes the unit to burrow, there is an extra "randomized" time on top of that. Not sure how creepspread works, but it's probably random too, true. Same probably for the SCV. Both of those things could actually follow a pattern, or a pattern of multiple possible ones (chosen randomly?), but at least they seem random. About other things: If two units attack each other, the "older" unit hits first, as far as I know. So basically, if you take one of your initial drones from the mineral line, it should beat a new built one due to that. This should also be true for abilities, e.g. two high templar feedbacking each other. Pathfinding isn't random. But the exact engine blizzard uses is unknown to us (I think). If it works properly, the units should just take the shortest path, but I think there are some bugs with cliffwalkers like colossus and reaper that make them take the longer paths sometimes.
This is not "small randomness", it's huge, most of the lucky window mine happened because of it.
The older unit used to win against a new one, but this has changed and it's no longer the case, at least in HoTs. Same for mana units.
I can't prove that the pathfinding is random (although I highly doubt they don't use an heuristic algorithm otherwise it would be very costly ressources wise and the shitty servers would be already dead...), however, units don't take the shortest path for sure, i have many replays where the units take a stupid path that is way longer than the obvious correct path.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
On October 24 2015 17:38 FireCake wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2015 17:25 Cyro wrote:It is random since the same inputs don't produce the same outputs. (or there is something hidden i am missing ?) I think the problem here is that the same inputs do produce the same outputs ( the engine is fully deterministic, that's the basis for the whole multiplayer and replay system) - but it's difficult for the player to consistently give a precice input because of timing and highly inconsistent input lag of the engine. Also sometimes, small variations can have chaotic results. To add to that, there are also effects in the engine (like the scan range problem demonstrated here - + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxWYxysVBvI - fixed in LOTV beta) which have the potential to mess with the response to input - even though it's completely predictable from an engine point of view, it feels random to the player. If the engine is fully deterministic then explains me these things : -how do you predict creep spread ? -if 2 melee units attack each other, let's say 2 zerglings, which one win ? -when an scv build a building how do you predict on which side of the building the unit goes ? -About the pathfinding, how do you know which path the units will take ? This thing has changed so many times, and still change, DK confirmed me they were going to change it again for LoTv (and obviously this kind of thing is never mentioned in patch notes...) -The burrow/unburrow time of almost all (or all ?) units vary, how do you determine how many time a lurker (for example) will need to burrow ? ...
-how do you predict creep spread ?
I'm not entirely sure but it's done the same every single simulation (for every player in the game of every replay viewed) using the same initial data - which is likely just the initial position of the creep tumor. They don't send a coordinate for every square of the map that gets new creep spread to it, AFAIK.
-if 2 melee units attack each other, let's say 2 zerglings, which one win ?
I've seen data on this. I think there's sometimes a delay - if you have a unit like a marine then there are times when the unit that was created first was guaranteed to shoot first.
-About the pathfinding, how do you know which path the units will take ?
I do not know, but the engine recieves a move command, knows the position of the unit when that command was registered and the path taken is the same. Every time. I can't prove that the pathfinding is random (although I highly doubt they don't use an heuristic algorithm otherwise it would be very costly ressources wise and the shitty servers would be already dead...), however, units don't take the shortest path for sure, i have many replays where the units take a stupid path that is way longer than the obvious correct path.
It's not the shortest path but it's the same path, given identical commands and initial conditions. That's easily demonstrated by looking at either a multiplayer game - your ally doesn't recieve data for the path your unit walks on, his client just knows where the unit is and recieves the coordinate of a move command. Watching a replay doesn't contain that data either - both in MP and watching a replay, it's a list of commands that are simulated with identical initial conditions and deterministic simulation so everything happens in the same way
-The burrow/unburrow time of almost all (or all ?) units vary, how do you determine how many time a lurker (for example) will need to burrow ?
As commented above, there seems to be a delay associated with this that could be random to the player at the time. There might actually be a few of them in the game, but many things that people assume to be random are actually not random but due to things like the scan range effect (video above), highly variable input lag (think something like 50ms +-25ms while some games manage 20ms +-5ms or less) and other effects. I'm not really sure of the extent of true randomness in the game.
The one that always bothered me the most was stalker vs marine. Sometimes you could kite way better than other times, sometimes you'd take a hit, sometimes like 5 marines would hit your stalker. That was due to a combination of the highly variable (uncontrollable) input lag and the scan range effect, two things that were fully deterministic and abusable by a machine but not by a human. They didn't need a seed or anything like that, it was two very understandable effects that happened to be borderline impossible for a human to track effectively. The second part of that is fixed now but not the first part - and you wouldn't understand either of them without looking deeper into the engine.
---------------------------------------------------
Strictly speaking computers are not random (even multi threaded applications), but what i care, as a player, is to understand the game and to be able to predict what is going to happen.
After years of play i still have no clue how to predict all the things i mentioned earlier.
Yeah i agree, sc2 is lacking in some ways there.
The input lag is really the worst one for me. Sc2 only processes input once every ~50 milliseconds so if you give an input you might have to wait 45 milliseconds for it to be registered or you might have to wait 5 milliseconds.
On top of that, there was the added delay of your ping plus a buffer (another 50 milliseconds)? so the lag is both extremely high for a twitchy RTS and also extremely variable. You can compensate very well for high latency but you can't compensate for variability unless you're a machine. It's predictable variability, but not by a human
|
On October 24 2015 13:23 Riner1212 wrote:
yea im not buying this game.
me neither. i am very disapointed about the game
|
On October 24 2015 18:35 FireCake wrote:
This is wrong.
Its very easy to add some randomness in a game but still have the same actions everytime you load the game or watch the replay.
How ?
Simply use a seed, for example a number like the date at which the game has been played and use this number to "solve" every random things of the game.
This is used in many video games for decades.
I dont think you know what the word "deterministic" means. What you describe is still completely deterministic. Randomness like the computer produces is not random at all. Its absolutely deterministic. It just feels random to humans because they dont know where the numbers come from.
On October 24 2015 18:35 FireCake wrote:Strictly speaking computers are not random (even multi threaded applications), but what i care, as a player, is to understand the game and to be able to predict what is going to happen.
Yes they are. Because once you have multithreading with several CPU's things become random if you dont program correctly. CPU's do not always run the same code with the exact same speed. Sometimes a calculation can take one or two nanoseconds more. On average its always the same, but individually its highly erratic. This comes as close to pure randomness as you can get since it is real physical randomness produced by collisions between electrons and atoms within the computer circuits.
You just use the wrong words. The game is completely deterministic and not random at all. But some actions are very complex and rely on a multitude of variables that are not visible to the player which makes them seem random. Its unpredictable. But not random.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
There is some stuff that is so unpredictable that it's practically random, there is other stuff that is very hard or even humanly impossible to utilize but you can program a bot to get right 100% of the time
|
The liberator change was needed because of the maps. But can someone explain the lurker den time nerf? It already takes a lot of time.
|
The delay before a Siege Tank in Siege Mode firing when being dropped by a Medivac has been increased from 0.53 to 1.43 seconds.
I know they don't want to hear this, but please can't they just not remove the drop thing and make the tank good again? Playing bio/tank is so fun in TvZ and right now it feels like we can't buff the tank because of drops but at the same time they keep on nerfing drops so they are useless anyway.
|
These are humongous nerfs to Terran, lol. My god.
On October 24 2015 20:00 StarscreamG1 wrote:
The liberator change was needed because of the maps. But can someone explain the lurker den time nerf? It already takes a lot of time.
I get that there were one or two mineral patches, in the nat and some third bases, on some maps, that were one or two squares out of range ... so if the Terran tech-rushed and attacked a greedy Zerg, some damage could be done. So, nerf the casting range by a little bit ... But a 61% reduction initially? Then an upgrade in the fusion core to return it to a 30% nerf of the original version?
And the tanks firing cool down after drop increased by 275%?
I mean ... this seems extreme.
|
I kinda like the liberator change. The rest is meh ; they address real issues, but I fear they never do it the right way ; for instance, I wish they removed the release interceptors thing and the sieged drop altogether instead of those convoluted "solutions". I hope I'm proved wrong when the game is released (this is most likely the last or the penultimate patch, right ?).
|
On October 24 2015 22:30 TimeSpiral wrote:These are humongous nerfs to Terran, lol. My god. Show nested quote +On October 24 2015 20:00 StarscreamG1 wrote:
The liberator change was needed because of the maps. But can someone explain the lurker den time nerf? It already takes a lot of time. I get that there were one or two mineral patches, in the nat and some third bases, on some maps, that were one or two squares out of range ... so if the Terran tech-rushed and attacked a greedy Zerg, some damage could be done. So, nerf the casting range by a little bit ... But a 61% reduction initially? Then an upgrade in the fusion core to return it to a 30% nerf of the original version?And the tanks firing cool down after drop increased by 275%? I mean ... this seems extreme.
I thought the cast range was 9 before, can anyone confirm what number it was before the patch? And the liberator thing is also quite a buff in certain situations, especially defensively early on when you suddenly have a quite some extra resources from not researching the upgrade and still can use the defender mode.
|
Ravagers were already able to deal with the liberator before they added the siege upgrade to the tech-lab. But two liberators with siege early and max range was a bit too strong. With the tech-lab upgrade it is completely pointless to use early as the investment is way too huge for something that can be dealt with easily (2 with instant siege was possible to stop, so 1 with a research cost is basically nothing in comparison).
This is a buff to the unit if you ask me. The units that deal with it still deal with it (vikings have no real problems stopping liberator harass). Zerg can rely more so on Queens and spores with the reduced range, but have to keep on their toes. In most situations the liberator could do damage with the max siege range, and I still think it will be able to get away a lot with nerfed range, especially to opponents who aren't prepared.
Not to mention this opens up some good timings in which liberators can be used to zone and protect your army much earlier and at less cost overall. Opponents will have to factor this into their unit choices more than they do now and hopefully as some have said this deals with issues like Nydus play. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.
|
On October 24 2015 13:23 Riner1212 wrote:
yea im not buying this game.
Thanks for fucking telling us! What an insightful comment.
|
Soooooooo, who is up for playing some nice HOTS today!? See you on ladder!
|
On October 24 2015 20:06 Gradient wrote:Show nested quote +
The delay before a Siege Tank in Siege Mode firing when being dropped by a Medivac has been increased from 0.53 to 1.43 seconds.
I know they don't want to hear this, but please can't they just not remove the drop thing and make the tank good again? Playing bio/tank is so fun in TvZ and right now it feels like we can't buff the tank because of drops but at the same time they keep on nerfing drops so they are useless anyway.
I think they are still afraid that improving siege tank damage again will make Bio unviable in TvT. The nerf is from that time though where everyone ran head on into a giant group of sieged tanks, so not sure it was ever needed.
|
On October 24 2015 20:06 Gradient wrote:Show nested quote +
The delay before a Siege Tank in Siege Mode firing when being dropped by a Medivac has been increased from 0.53 to 1.43 seconds.
I know they don't want to hear this, but please can't they just not remove the drop thing and make the tank good again? Playing bio/tank is so fun in TvZ and right now it feels like we can't buff the tank because of drops but at the same time they keep on nerfing drops so they are useless anyway.
TvT is a joke right now. Doom drops were already stupid. How does 6 sieged tanks instantly in your base sound? And the matchup is now 100% about air control. Who ever wins that wins the game cause your tanks will never tank damage. You could be behind 100 supply and still be fine if you have enough vikings and a couple siege tanks with medivacs
|
I like how adepts were nerfed by 10 hp with compensation of stim-like upgrade and now liberators just... Into the ground.
|
IMHO the Liberator Change is very awkward.
In order to get the former 9 range (initial 4 + 5 from advanced ballistics upgrade) you need a
1) fusion core, which enables the
2) advanced balistics upgrade to be researched at a
3) techlab attached to a startport.
While the change is not bad, it still (and this is what I hoped for) does not remove the game-flow-ruining awkwardness of having to research an upgrade for a reactor-producable-unit at a techlab.
Why not make the balistics upgrade researchable at the fusion core directly (just like the yamato cannon)?!?
|
So with the adept buff the warpprism adept allin with up to 8 gates is unstoppable again in TvP? Proxy robo, you cannot deny the unload and warpin and once the adepts are in your base they keep running around, not to meantion I cant even have enough units out to fight them. For example cc first on orbital shipyard into 3 rax standard, simply impossible. Anyone has an idea or is it just broken again? (Talking about the 2 base version).
|
On October 25 2015 03:04 junghansmega wrote:
IMHO the Liberator Change is very awkward.
In order to get the former 9 range (initial 4 + 5 from advanced ballistics upgrade) you need a
1) fusion core, which enables the
2) advanced balistics upgrade to be researched at a
3) techlab attached to a startport.
While the change is not bad, it still (and this is what I hoped for) does not remove the game-flow-ruining awkwardness of having to research an upgrade for a reactor-producable-unit at a techlab.
Why not make the balistics upgrade researchable at the fusion core directly (just like the yamato cannon)?!?
Fully agree with this. I find tech lab upgrades that require additional tech are somewhat akward to begin with. But when they are on the starport (which you usually only have one of) and it's for a reactored unit they always become very inaccessible.
|
On October 25 2015 03:22 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 03:04 junghansmega wrote:
IMHO the Liberator Change is very awkward.
In order to get the former 9 range (initial 4 + 5 from advanced ballistics upgrade) you need a
1) fusion core, which enables the
2) advanced balistics upgrade to be researched at a
3) techlab attached to a startport.
While the change is not bad, it still (and this is what I hoped for) does not remove the game-flow-ruining awkwardness of having to research an upgrade for a reactor-producable-unit at a techlab.
Why not make the balistics upgrade researchable at the fusion core directly (just like the yamato cannon)?!? Fully agree with this. I find tech lab upgrades that require additional tech are somewhat akward to begin with. But when they are on the starport (which you usually only have one of) and it's for a reactored unit they always become very inaccessible.
This guys get is, it can be reactored, they have to make it inaccessible somehow, I feel like now that they can't auto target mineral lines (ridiculous) the unit is in a much better place, previously it did the Vikings/Banshees/Siege Tanks job all in one.
Either the upgrade or make it a straight up tech lab unit.
|
On October 25 2015 02:52 Almand wrote:
I like how adepts were nerfed by 10 hp with compensation of stim-like upgrade and now liberators just... Into the ground.
adepts were nerfed by 30 hp, and the 50 hp upgrade was also removed. the 10 hp was a second nerf.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
On October 25 2015 03:04 junghansmega wrote:
IMHO the Liberator Change is very awkward.
In order to get the former 9 range (initial 4 + 5 from advanced ballistics upgrade) you need a
1) fusion core, which enables the
2) advanced balistics upgrade to be researched at a
3) techlab attached to a startport.
While the change is not bad, it still (and this is what I hoped for) does not remove the game-flow-ruining awkwardness of having to research an upgrade for a reactor-producable-unit at a techlab.
Why not make the balistics upgrade researchable at the fusion core directly (just like the yamato cannon)?!?
Didn't they do that? I have not played yet, but i assumed they would do something like that. Either unlocked on the condition of having a fusion core or researched from it
|
Great that liberators got some nerf because they are one of the trio/quad of OP air units...but uh what? Only liberator is nerfed?
Brood+parasitic bomb is absolutely disgusting because once you "get there" you autowin the game. Well vs Terran at least.
And mass carrier is also a freewin once you "get there" with high templars...these things should not be like this. -50hp on carriers is a good start...but this unit is so fundamentally broken it's ridiculous. You almost get rewarded with a freewin just from accumulating 8 carriers and then continually spamming them from stargates with no thought in the world.
I love how i joke around on stream that "any time you say a T unit like liberator is OP along with Z/P units...blizzard only hears "NERF TERRAN NERF TERRAN NOW" ."
And that's basically what they did. They still are ignoring how absurd parasitic bomb is.
I've played plenty of off-race ZvT games where i just turtle with roach/hydra/lurker into brood + mass vipers with 10+ parasitic bombs and my Terran opponent has absolutely no way to fight versus this and most of them even ask me in chat, "what do i do vs this" and i tell them "nothing, you just die there's no counter atm lol".
-_-
Also to add another thought because i have been playing a ton of Zerg and have experienced a ton of ZvP lately...even the OP parasitic bomb cannot deal with mass carriers...that in itself says a lot lol. There's no unit Zerg can build to fight carriers once there are 6-8 + carriers + any amount of high templar/tempests. You just basically die no matter how many bases you're on and no matter what happened the first 15 min of the game.
Carriers need to be toned down more imo.
|
On October 25 2015 03:04 junghansmega wrote:
Why not make the balistics upgrade researchable at the fusion core directly (just like the yamato cannon)?!?
This is what they should have done. Any unit designed to be reactorable is going to have a rough time getting their upgrade from a tech lab. But then you require a fusion core AND a tech lab? If it's not crazy overpowered, it's going to be severely neglected. You can shove the timing farther down if necessary by playing with its research time or cost, but unlike armories, fusion cores require starports to even start building so your timing is already naturally pushed forward.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
Great that liberators got some nerf because they are one of the trio/quad of OP air units...but uh what? Only liberator is nerfed?
Carrier got 50 health nerf. Zerg and especially terrans have great carrier counters at the moment; carriers are not good against terran. If you build 10 carriers (60 supply) then terrans often just respond with 20-30 liberators (40-60 supply) and oneshot all of your interceptors effortlessly.
Even with release interceptor vs zerg, it wasn't freewin but that mechanic was kinda silly and hard to balance. Without it, i'm confident that carrier was fine without the health nerf and likely without the build time nerf too, at the moment (unless you go through, nerf carrier, liberator AA and AG, parasitic bomb all at the same time)
|
we are rarely if ever going to see carrier again avilo so you should not worry, it's just not good enough anymore
|
On October 24 2015 11:49 HomeWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2015 11:37 Cyro wrote:On October 24 2015 11:34 HomeWorld wrote:On October 24 2015 11:32 ROOTFayth wrote:On October 24 2015 11:08 HomeWorld wrote:
Man, i'm fine with the liberator change, but, what's the point of decreasing the health of carriers (they still do the same damage and quite fast to even matter) or the increase to adept's shield (as if this Warhound 2.0 unit was struggling against fictive scenarios that only blizzard can conceive) warhound 2.0? the unit is garbage man, wake up LOL That's exactly what i'm saying, the unit (adept) is garbage and ready for recycling. Fayth is commenting on the balance, while you are bypassing that entirely and commenting on the design (which you subjectively do not like, but a lot of other people do like) For sure I fail to understand what you're trying to say (with a good reason, you're not making any sense). Probably this is just another meaningless post to bolster your post count (as usual) User was warned for this post
What he's saying is that comparing the adept to the warhound is asinine because the warhound was OP. Ya dingus.
|
On October 25 2015 05:49 ROOTFayth wrote:
we are rarely if ever going to see carrier again avilo so you should not worry, it's just not good enough anymore
he's not happy with a 50 health nerf. Hell, he's prob not happy until that thing is completely useless like BW scout.
|
On October 25 2015 05:23 avilo wrote:
Great that liberators got some nerf because they are one of the trio/quad of OP air units...but uh what? Only liberator is nerfed?
Brood+parasitic bomb is absolutely disgusting because once you "get there" you autowin the game. Well vs Terran at least.
And mass carrier is also a freewin once you "get there" with high templars...these things should not be like this. -50hp on carriers is a good start...but this unit is so fundamentally broken it's ridiculous. You almost get rewarded with a freewin just from accumulating 8 carriers and then continually spamming them from stargates with no thought in the world.
I love how i joke around on stream that "any time you say a T unit like liberator is OP along with Z/P units...blizzard only hears "NERF TERRAN NERF TERRAN NOW" ."
Yeah, I'm sorry but I hardly believe that blizzard is taking anything from your stream. Get your head out of your own ass and stop being so biased. YOU are the guy that keeps on bitching about any nerf that hits Terran's ultimate compositions (e.g. recently ravens, mules). Now blizzard introduces a patch that will leave the liberator exactly the same once "you get there". I repeat, EXACTLY THE SAME ONCE YOU GET THERE. Meanwhile the carrier gets an actual nerf. Those 50hp are not added back by some upgrade, neither does the carrier get a buff for it in some form like the liberator free defender mode at 4range in this patch.
And that's basically what they did. They still are ignoring how absurd parasitic bomb is.
This is a point I fully agree with you, but for the most part it hits exactly one playstyle, which happens to be yours (Terran mech), but not even the race as a whole. The parasitic bomb is so far hardly being used against bio and for PvZ we both share the opinion that even with parasitic bomb lategame protoss air is pretty strong. But give it some time, 50hp is a nice nerf to start of with and maybe there can be something figured out around fungal growth killing interceptors and just masses of corruptors to deal with the issue.
Also to add another thought because i have been playing a ton of Zerg and have experienced a ton of ZvP lately...even the OP parasitic bomb cannot deal with mass carriers...that in itself says a lot lol. There's no unit Zerg can build to fight carriers once there are 6-8 + carriers + any amount of high templar/tempests. You just basically die no matter how many bases you're on and no matter what happened the first 15 min of the game.
Carriers need to be toned down more imo.
I've played plenty of off-race ZvT games where i just turtle with roach/hydra/lurker into brood + mass vipers with 10+ parasitic bombs and my Terran opponent has absolutely no way to fight versus this and most of them even ask me in chat, "what do i do vs this" and i tell them "nothing, you just die there's no counter atm lol".
Yeah, and you know, funny story because I watch your stream quite sometimes and the last two times you started to offrace zerg for a few days your MMR dropped from high master to ~diamond with that stupidly inefficient playstyle.
Learn to defend against bio properly first instead of complaining how "dumb drops are" (hint: mobile units help), learn to scout ZvZ instead of wondering how your opponent figured that you would be going for a 2base roach timing (when he sees your superfast roach warren and evo chambers and has an overlord about your untaken 3rd) and maybe take some lessons in ZvP. The way you lose to each and every 2base attack and the way you let those protoss players take 5bases in 10mins and then complain about carriers... yeah, I'm sorry but you just aren't a good zerg player. You are mechanically very strong and that helps a ton with zerg, but you have absolutely no idea about the strategies in at least 2 of the matchups.
|
Big J, just dont reply to Avilo. It only causes me stress when I do so. All his points are super biased that he will fervantly downplay any benefits T receives and advocates for any valid strategies other races have available to combat T. It's the typical 'dont nerf my race bro' multiplied by 100 to the point where he just doesn't even care about his reputation as a biased
|
I feel like everytime they nerf/fix/change the tankivac, it's a change SOOOO SPECIFIC that its just alittle silly. I understand it's strong...but if you think about it...that's just like saying "colossus attack from unload time from warp prism is 1.5 seconds". Or "Ultralisk attack from unload time from overload 1.5"...like what!? Why should 1 specific combination of units have such a specific rule that only applies to them?
I just don't understand why a nerf has to be so extremely specific to 1 unit. Imagine a new player coming into the game. Common logic would tell them "i can pick up a siege tank in seige mode with a medivac, so i'll unload it so that it will hit this target as I drop it". However, this nerf/balance/rule (whatever you want to call the siege tank delay) IS TAILORED TO THIS PAIR, that an average player might not know about the nerf and think "hmm, that's weird, when i unload my siege tank, why is there a 1.5 second delay before it shoots? Why don't other units get this nerf on unload either?".
A more logical change would be like...if a siege tank gets picked up in siege mode...it would automatically RE-siege as it drops (with full visual animation queue to reduce any confusion). Or if a tank in siege mode gets picked up, it will need to be re-seiged manually on unload. Not this silly "1.5 seconds delay before shooting" dealio. I think it just adds a small layer of inconsistency in the game that everyone has to just understand before using the unit.
Sorry for the ramble, but does anyone feel the same way? Either delay it (by forcing it to have some kind of visual queue like automatic reseiging on unload), or just let it be used as it once was originally.
|
On October 25 2015 03:04 junghansmega wrote:
IMHO the Liberator Change is very awkward.
In order to get the former 9 range (initial 4 + 5 from advanced ballistics upgrade) you need a
1) fusion core, which enables the
2) advanced balistics upgrade to be researched at a
3) techlab attached to a startport.
While the change is not bad, it still (and this is what I hoped for) does not remove the game-flow-ruining awkwardness of having to research an upgrade for a reactor-producable-unit at a techlab.
Why not make the balistics upgrade researchable at the fusion core directly (just like the yamato cannon)?!?
Pretty good point.
|
On October 25 2015 03:15 Aquila- wrote:
So with the adept buff the warpprism adept allin with up to 8 gates is unstoppable again in TvP? Proxy robo, you cannot deny the unload and warpin and once the adepts are in your base they keep running around, not to meantion I cant even have enough units out to fight them. For example cc first on orbital shipyard into 3 rax standard, simply impossible. Anyone has an idea or is it just broken again? (Talking about the 2 base version).
10 hp does not make a strategy go from unused to unstoppable...with the warp prism warp in nerf and the first adept change you should not have a terrible time holding assuming you react appropriately
|
On October 25 2015 07:56 WhaleOFaTALE1 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 03:15 Aquila- wrote:
So with the adept buff the warpprism adept allin with up to 8 gates is unstoppable again in TvP? Proxy robo, you cannot deny the unload and warpin and once the adepts are in your base they keep running around, not to meantion I cant even have enough units out to fight them. For example cc first on orbital shipyard into 3 rax standard, simply impossible. Anyone has an idea or is it just broken again? (Talking about the 2 base version). 10 hp does not make a strategy go from unused to unstoppable...with the warp prism warp in nerf and the first adept change you should not have a terrible time holding assuming you react appropriately
It wasnt unused before, just less common. The warp in still comes faster than you can react and yes if its mass adept vs unupgraded marines then 10 hp make a big difference. It was hard to stop before the 10 hp buff but now it seems impossible. You say react appropiatly, but what do you do if you only see gates in protoss main. You cant have more units than normal 3 rax production unless you went 5 rax before gas which is bad and the protoss could do many things, you cant just make 6 bunkers spread at every cliff to your base.
|
Make it so tank medivacs can shoot air IMO. How sweet would it be to see mass carrier vs mass air tanks haha.
|
Casting Mass Recall with the Mothership while moving should now be more responsive.
Finally.....
|
On October 25 2015 09:01 Teogamer wrote:
Make it so tank medivacs can shoot air IMO. How sweet would it be to see mass carrier vs mass air tanks haha.
Blizzard, hire this man.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
You cant have more units than normal 3 rax production
If he has 8 gateways, a robo and a twilight council and you're on 3 rax without stim then you messed up. I'm not sure if you mean adepts with or without the upgrade, but 2-base adept non-upgrade pushes are far, far weaker than before since they removed 40 base health then added 10 back again.
For example, widow mines oneshot them with notable splash damage.
|
On October 25 2015 06:50 parkufarku wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 05:49 ROOTFayth wrote:
we are rarely if ever going to see carrier again avilo so you should not worry, it's just not good enough anymore he's not happy with a 50 health nerf. Hell, he's prob not happy until that thing is completely useless like BW scout.
What the hell are you guys responding to? I said liberators should be nerfed ages ago, but only in combination with the other OP air units of each race.
Instead, liberators are mostly nerfed and parasitic bomb is still the same and carriers -50 HP are essentially the same too -_- you don't see a problem when you only basically nerfbat Terran?
|
Hey TL Mods, can we get some sort of poll or so going about TvT? I feel like everybody in LotV has started to hate the matchup, my own experience is that everyone is cheesing and if you ask them why it is because they don't want to play TvT.
I mean, it's getting ridiculous, the expansion should make stuff better, but it feels like everyone thinks TvT went from a 5star matchup to 1star or something like that and blizzard is running on the stance that tank drops are fun and it doesn't matter at all if people actually hate game because of it, for as long as that thing itself somehow seems fun...
|
On October 25 2015 09:30 Cyro wrote:If he has 8 gateways, a robo and a twilight council and you're on 3 rax without stim then you messed up. I'm not sure if you mean adepts with or without the upgrade, but 2-base adept non-upgrade pushes are far, far weaker than before since they removed 40 base health then added 10 back again. For example, widow mines oneshot them with notable splash damage.
Here is a replay, the allin hits before 5 min when stim is like half way done. Didnt have the best macro but I added 2 rax when I saw many gates because I guessed it, instantly pulled all scvs and marines and still died. So what could I have done?
http://ggtracker.com/matches/6226677
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
On October 25 2015 10:18 Aquila- wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 09:30 Cyro wrote:You cant have more units than normal 3 rax production If he has 8 gateways, a robo and a twilight council and you're on 3 rax without stim then you messed up. I'm not sure if you mean adepts with or without the upgrade, but 2-base adept non-upgrade pushes are far, far weaker than before since they removed 40 base health then added 10 back again. For example, widow mines oneshot them with notable splash damage. Here is a replay, the allin hits before 5 min when stim is like half way done. Didnt have the best macro but I added 2 rax when I saw many gates because I guessed it, instantly pulled all scvs and marines and still died. So what could I have done? http://ggtracker.com/matches/6226677
Ahahaha that looks exactly like the shit i would do if terran went CC first and then delayed rax and gas for engi bay blocking nexus :D
You should really evaluate your own play and openings because that's not the only thing that you're vulnerable to. You are just immediately deflecting blame onto your opponent/balance every game by doing that before even considering anything else
A protoss player cannot reasonably put 12 units in your base when you have 13 unupgraded marines and no other army units unless you have an opening full of holes like that. If it happens, it doesn't matter if those units are Adepts or not
|
Avilo's rants are so funny. Dude always tries to be constructive but ends up failing in doing so through his incredible (incredible) Terran bias.
|
On October 25 2015 10:01 Big J wrote:
Hey TL Mods, can we get some sort of poll or so going about TvT? I feel like everybody in LotV has started to hate the matchup, my own experience is that everyone is cheesing and if you ask them why it is because they don't want to play TvT.
I mean, it's getting ridiculous, the expansion should make stuff better, but it feels like everyone thinks TvT went from a 5star matchup to 1star or something like that and blizzard is running on the stance that tank drops are fun and it doesn't matter at all if people actually hate game because of it, for as long as that thing itself somehow seems fun...
Are tank medivac drops still super strong with the new delay? Didn't it change anything?
|
On October 25 2015 10:01 Big J wrote:
Hey TL Mods, can we get some sort of poll or so going about TvT? I feel like everybody in LotV has started to hate the matchup, my own experience is that everyone is cheesing and if you ask them why it is because they don't want to play TvT.
I mean, it's getting ridiculous, the expansion should make stuff better, but it feels like everyone thinks TvT went from a 5star matchup to 1star or something like that and blizzard is running on the stance that tank drops are fun and it doesn't matter at all if people actually hate game because of it, for as long as that thing itself somehow seems fun...
I feel that TvT has gone downward since the medieval boost was introduced. Hopefully Lotv TvT won´t be only mass doom dropping and yolo BC jumps....
|
Denmark145 Posts
Good patch, really like the liberator changes  Playing with the tank-medivacs in TvT still seems a bit silly though
|
On October 25 2015 20:05 RaFox17 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 10:01 Big J wrote:
Hey TL Mods, can we get some sort of poll or so going about TvT? I feel like everybody in LotV has started to hate the matchup, my own experience is that everyone is cheesing and if you ask them why it is because they don't want to play TvT.
I mean, it's getting ridiculous, the expansion should make stuff better, but it feels like everyone thinks TvT went from a 5star matchup to 1star or something like that and blizzard is running on the stance that tank drops are fun and it doesn't matter at all if people actually hate game because of it, for as long as that thing itself somehow seems fun... I feel that TvT has gone downward since the medieval boost was introduced. Hopefully Lotv TvT won´t be only mass doom dropping and yolo BC jumps....
Uh no? You dont know anything about the state of matchup if you think thats happening. BCs arent used at all.
Whats happening instead is tank drops and huge less emphasis on tank positioning and more of surprise drop factor using medivac ever before, which kinda ruins the tank vs tank positioning aspects.
Even with delay, the mobility you gain from medivac far outweighs without as it is only 1 second compared to 5-6 seconds of unsieged siege time.
|
On October 25 2015 22:01 jinjin5000 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 20:05 RaFox17 wrote:On October 25 2015 10:01 Big J wrote:
Hey TL Mods, can we get some sort of poll or so going about TvT? I feel like everybody in LotV has started to hate the matchup, my own experience is that everyone is cheesing and if you ask them why it is because they don't want to play TvT.
I mean, it's getting ridiculous, the expansion should make stuff better, but it feels like everyone thinks TvT went from a 5star matchup to 1star or something like that and blizzard is running on the stance that tank drops are fun and it doesn't matter at all if people actually hate game because of it, for as long as that thing itself somehow seems fun... I feel that TvT has gone downward since the medieval boost was introduced. Hopefully Lotv TvT won´t be only mass doom dropping and yolo BC jumps.... Uh no? You dont know anything about the state of matchup if you think thats happening. BCs arent used at all. Whats happening instead is tank drops and huge less emphasis on tank positioning and more of surprise drop factor using medivac ever before, which kinda ruins the tank vs tank positioning aspects. Even with delay, the mobility you gain from medivac far outweighs without as it is only 1 second compared to 5-6 seconds of unsieged siege time.
I was talking about the future with the BC´s. My personal opinion is that TvT is easily the worst mirror in Hots and has a good chance of being the same in Lotv if medivacs stay the same.
|
I have been quite negative, but this seems quite good. I play random, so I don´t root for any race. Carriers were pretty strong, not sure if two nerfs aren´t too much, but it seems fine. Liberator is good again, it can defend against early pushes really well, fends of mutas and other nonsense really well and later on can offer good suppressing fire and support. Lurker den just disrupts annoying timing, which is good, adept is back in happy spot and nerf on tanks is gr8 too, it just lessens supper annoying harass possibilities.
I still hope for even mineral fields and hopefully less need for fast expanding, to make the game less stressful, but well, on can hope .
|
On October 25 2015 22:01 jinjin5000 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 20:05 RaFox17 wrote:On October 25 2015 10:01 Big J wrote:
Hey TL Mods, can we get some sort of poll or so going about TvT? I feel like everybody in LotV has started to hate the matchup, my own experience is that everyone is cheesing and if you ask them why it is because they don't want to play TvT.
I mean, it's getting ridiculous, the expansion should make stuff better, but it feels like everyone thinks TvT went from a 5star matchup to 1star or something like that and blizzard is running on the stance that tank drops are fun and it doesn't matter at all if people actually hate game because of it, for as long as that thing itself somehow seems fun... I feel that TvT has gone downward since the medieval boost was introduced. Hopefully Lotv TvT won´t be only mass doom dropping and yolo BC jumps.... Uh no? You dont know anything about the state of matchup if you think thats happening. BCs arent used at all. Whats happening instead is tank drops and huge less emphasis on tank positioning and more of surprise drop factor using medivac ever before, which kinda ruins the tank vs tank positioning aspects. Even with delay, the mobility you gain from medivac far outweighs without as it is only 1 second compared to 5-6 seconds of unsieged siege time.
DK designs the game around "cool" moments.
in his view blowing everything up with a surprise doom drop is far more exciting than boring positional battles.
|
On October 25 2015 20:11 Liquid`Bunny wrote:Good patch, really like the liberator changes Playing with the tank-medivacs in TvT still seems a bit silly though
People should read this message cuz liberators got buffed not nerfed
You can open liberators now you can do Hellbat/Liberator push and all in on 2 or 3 bases
People should expect a damage nerf on liberators at least.
|
On October 25 2015 11:21 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2015 10:18 Aquila- wrote:On October 25 2015 09:30 Cyro wrote:You cant have more units than normal 3 rax production If he has 8 gateways, a robo and a twilight council and you're on 3 rax without stim then you messed up. I'm not sure if you mean adepts with or without the upgrade, but 2-base adept non-upgrade pushes are far, far weaker than before since they removed 40 base health then added 10 back again. For example, widow mines oneshot them with notable splash damage. Here is a replay, the allin hits before 5 min when stim is like half way done. Didnt have the best macro but I added 2 rax when I saw many gates because I guessed it, instantly pulled all scvs and marines and still died. So what could I have done? http://ggtracker.com/matches/6226677 Ahahaha that looks exactly like the shit i would do if terran went CC first and then delayed rax and gas for engi bay blocking nexus :D You should really evaluate your own play and openings because that's not the only thing that you're vulnerable to. You are just immediately deflecting blame onto your opponent/balance every game by doing that before even considering anything else A protoss player cannot reasonably put 12 units in your base when you have 13 unupgraded marines and no other army units unless you have an opening full of holes like that. If it happens, it doesn't matter if those units are Adepts or not
So I still dont have a concrete suggestion of what I could have done. I used a standard build order and there is no way to know if it is warpprism and at what location it will fly into my base.
|
You better nerf disruptor hard .... its so terrible designed
|
Well .. expect liberator, what is new in terran game play (when zvt has got sick new game play with new units and abilities) ?? It looks like this extension is a fail, they removed all things from terran, and are still trying things 3 weeks before the game get out ..
Sorry blizz, but this time you failed
|
I still think Adepts, as they are now, should be higher tech. They overlap too much with the stalkers at the gateway tech and i think it would be nice as twilight council/templar archives tech or even a new tech building like we had with the observatory and the arbiter tribunal back in bw.
|
What i dont get is the delay on siege tank firing when dropping a sieged tank..
I mean whats the whole point of picking them up while sieged if the firing delay is almost as long as it takes to siege???
Why not make the delay when you pick the siege tank up instead? Show a little animation of something lowering to pick it up(Like a magnet they use to pick up cars). To me that seems to make more sense, but i'll just say I could be completely wrong. And they could still have a tiny delay before it fires as well,
|
On October 26 2015 09:26 NyxNax wrote:
What i dont get is the delay on siege tank firing when dropping a sieged tank..
I mean whats the whole point of picking them up while sieged if the firing delay is almost as long as it takes to siege???
Why not make the delay when you pick the siege tank up instead? Show a little animation of something lowering to pick it up(Like a magnet they use to pick up cars). To me that seems to make more sense, but i'll just say I could be completely wrong. And they could still have a tiny delay before it fires as well,
Because the entire idea behind picking up while sieged is not only used for offensive purposes but to save your tanks while they are sieged?
|
On October 24 2015 22:45 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2015 22:30 TimeSpiral wrote:These are humongous nerfs to Terran, lol. My god. On October 24 2015 20:00 StarscreamG1 wrote:
The liberator change was needed because of the maps. But can someone explain the lurker den time nerf? It already takes a lot of time. I get that there were one or two mineral patches, in the nat and some third bases, on some maps, that were one or two squares out of range ... so if the Terran tech-rushed and attacked a greedy Zerg, some damage could be done. So, nerf the casting range by a little bit ... But a 61% reduction initially? Then an upgrade in the fusion core to return it to a 30% nerf of the original version?And the tanks firing cool down after drop increased by 275%? I mean ... this seems extreme. I thought the cast range was 9 before, can anyone confirm what number it was before the patch? And the liberator thing is also quite a buff in certain situations, especially defensively early on when you suddenly have a quite some extra resources from not researching the upgrade and still can use the defender mode.
I'm almost certain it was 13 ... that's still what it says on Liquipedia for the Liberator. But, I don't know. I could be wrong. Either way, it's a huge nerf. The Liberator is a glass cannon, and the targeting area is essentially the same as a Marine (exactly the same, except that it can't move). If it's that close to it's targeting area, then it's flanks are even more exposed than they already were, because now the Lib is significantly closer to the action.
The delayed cost of 150/150 plus a techlab is nice, but now we need a fusion core and a 150/150 upgrade, and a tech lab--fucking lol!--so expect to never see range researched except for late-game (if people even bother).
I've seen some try and dice this up as a buff -- definitely not Terran players saying this. This is--without question, in my mind--a nerf, and it's a gigantic one, as I tried to explain in my original comment.
The Medivac drop siege timing is extremely slow now. I mean, I get it why they're doing this, but now it just feel unresponsive. You have time to think to yourself, "what's happening? Why isn't my tank shooting?" Then it shoots. It's stupid.
But, maybe I'm wrong and the tank drop is supposed to be purely defensive, to individually with two units a piece dodge the new point-and-kill abilities of Zerg and Protoss. *shrugs*
|
On October 26 2015 10:04 TimeSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On October 24 2015 22:45 Big J wrote:On October 24 2015 22:30 TimeSpiral wrote:These are humongous nerfs to Terran, lol. My god. On October 24 2015 20:00 StarscreamG1 wrote:
The liberator change was needed because of the maps. But can someone explain the lurker den time nerf? It already takes a lot of time. I get that there were one or two mineral patches, in the nat and some third bases, on some maps, that were one or two squares out of range ... so if the Terran tech-rushed and attacked a greedy Zerg, some damage could be done. So, nerf the casting range by a little bit ... But a 61% reduction initially? Then an upgrade in the fusion core to return it to a 30% nerf of the original version?And the tanks firing cool down after drop increased by 275%? I mean ... this seems extreme. I thought the cast range was 9 before, can anyone confirm what number it was before the patch? And the liberator thing is also quite a buff in certain situations, especially defensively early on when you suddenly have a quite some extra resources from not researching the upgrade and still can use the defender mode. I'm almost certain it was 13 ... that's still what it says on Liquipedia for the Liberator. But, I don't know. I could be wrong. Either way, it's a huge nerf. The Liberator is a glass cannon, and the targeting area is essentially the same as a Marine (exactly the same, except that it can't move). If it's that close to it's targeting area, then it's flanks are even more exposed than they already were, because now the Lib is significantly closer to the action. The delayed cost of 150/150 plus a techlab is nice, but now we need a fusion core and a 150/150 upgrade, and a tech lab--fucking lol!--so expect to never see range researched except for late-game (if people even bother). I've seen some try and dice this up as a buff -- definitely not Terran players saying this. This is--without question, in my mind--a nerf, and it's a gigantic one, as I tried to explain in my original comment. The Medivac drop siege timing is extremely slow now. I mean, I get it why they're doing this, but now it just feel unresponsive. You have time to think to yourself, "what's happening? Why isn't my tank shooting?" Then it shoots. It's stupid. But, maybe I'm wrong and the tank drop is supposed to be purely defensive, to individually with two units a piece dodge the new point-and-kill abilities of Zerg and Protoss. *shrugs*
Cast range for the ablity was 9, the weapon range is 13. It made little sense because even with the extended range from the AoE of the ability, the range was only 11.5
|
the liberators weapon range was and I think still is 13. the cast range of the circle is 5(+4) and I think it was previously 9 as well.
you place the circlecenter in up to 9range which means that the furthest part of the circle can be (assuming the circleradius is 4) 13range away, thus the weaponrange of the liberator needs to be 13 to shoot even at the furthest possible point within its circle.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
On October 26 2015 11:55 Big J wrote:
the liberators weapon range was and I think still is 13. the cast range of the circle is 5(+4) and I think it was previously 9 as well.
you place the circlecenter in up to 9range which means that the furthest part of the circle can be (assuming the circleradius is 4) 13range away, thus the weaponrange of the liberator needs to be 13 to shoot even at the furthest possible point within its circle.
I think the radius is a few range longer than you're giving it - 5(+4) + 6 for circle edge.
|
On October 26 2015 11:55 Big J wrote:
the liberators weapon range was and I think still is 13. the cast range of the circle is 5(+4) and I think it was previously 9 as well.
you place the circlecenter in up to 9range which means that the furthest part of the circle can be (assuming the circleradius is 4) 13range away, thus the weaponrange of the liberator needs to be 13 to shoot even at the furthest possible point within its circle.
On October 26 2015 12:14 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2015 11:55 Big J wrote:
the liberators weapon range was and I think still is 13. the cast range of the circle is 5(+4) and I think it was previously 9 as well.
you place the circlecenter in up to 9range which means that the furthest part of the circle can be (assuming the circleradius is 4) 13range away, thus the weaponrange of the liberator needs to be 13 to shoot even at the furthest possible point within its circle. I think the radius is a few range longer than you're giving it - 5(+4) + 6 for circle edge.
I assumed it was something like that. That makes this nerf a little more interesting. The fusion core + upgrade is going to come so late, it essentially removes full functionality from the majority of games. Part of me wishes they would have given a little something, maybe slightly reducing the time it takes to deactivate Defender Mode.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
I assumed it was something like that. That makes this nerf a little more interesting. The fusion core + upgrade is going to come so late, it essentially removes full functionality from the majority of games.
It's a big buff in a few ways, just faced a terran hitting before 7 mins with stim, 2-4 medivacs, liberators rallied and third base now that you don't have to worry about researching - the range doesn't change much, they have 10 range starting out so it's enough to bypass photon overcharge and comfortably get guarded by marines with some extra range.
Went 1gate-nexus-core-stargate (for a phoenix blob) and failed to hold it both times. Got adept upgrade the second time, didn't help that much. It seems like a very strong style.
|
Btw, anybody know if there is another balance update this beta or will this mess be released?
|
On October 27 2015 05:47 Big J wrote:
Btw, anybody know if there is another balance update this beta or will this mess be released?
They just said the beta is going to end very soon so probably no patch before release. They will wait till everyone has bought the game and then hit hard with the nerfs.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
On October 27 2015 05:47 Big J wrote:
Btw, anybody know if there is another balance update this beta or will this mess be released?
They're balance updating like every week ATM
|
On October 27 2015 07:24 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2015 05:47 Big J wrote:
Btw, anybody know if there is another balance update this beta or will this mess be released? They're balance updating like every week ATM
This just makes me sad since they could have been more 'active' all thoughout the beta
|
disruptors are a terrible unit for the game, they need to be addressed.
|
On October 27 2015 08:32 91matt wrote:
disruptors are a terrible unit for the game, they need to be addressed.
Great points with well thought out reasoning and solutions. Thank you
|
On October 27 2015 08:42 Beliskner wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2015 08:32 91matt wrote:
disruptors are a terrible unit for the game, they need to be addressed. Great points with well thought out reasoning and solutions. Thank you
I keep it concise
|
With the new patch ( I am talking as a terran player ) Cyclones are still useless, Tanks drops are now almost useless and even with a bunch of marauders ghosts, ultras are still IMBAs !
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://bnetcmsus-a.akamaihd.net/cms/blog_header/dt/DT325WFJJTMR1429062779566.jpg)
