On December 07 2012 01:43 Eufouria wrote: The medivac seems way too buffed. It seems like its a change designed to make bio more resistant to AoE damage so a bio army can actually engage late deathballs but its such a buff to early-mid game timings and drop play. Maybe if they turn it into a fusion core upgrade it can then be balanced around late game, which should be easier, although I still think it will probably make drop play too good.
It's not a buff to any early or mid game timings. The upgrade is on a tech lab which in itself negates any "timings" you could do with this because you:
a) won't have the medivac count for "timings" since no reactored starport b) you have to research the upgrade first
It's an upgrade geared towards making bio stronger in late game engagements, which was something Terran was lacking with bio vs Protoss/Zerg in Wings of Liberty.
Are you serious??? It has a free speed boost that lasts 8 seconds every 20 seconds... how is that not a buff?
Also, the new raven change is terrible for a multitude of reasons. a) seeker missile is still inaccessible as hell in real games where there's action back and forth b) single target damage means it's going to suck vs mass brood/corruptor/infestor balls
I've seen people comparing it to yamato...and it's quite obvious it's almost exactly the same. Raven honestly does not need any changes except making it a more accessible unit in terms of the time it takes to get it's abilities into play.
CORVID REACTOR INCREASE RAVEN START ENERGY TO 100.
Makes the raven accessible, waits 25 energy for seeker missile instead of 50, and raven has immediate use with a PDD or two auto turrets.
Adding a yamato cannon to the raven is a terrible idea -_-
On December 07 2012 03:57 TheRabidDeer wrote: I dont understand the medivac changes. Medivac drops were already brutal to deal with before, but now they heal twice as fast (remember how many lings it took to fend off a drop before? now lings will NEVER fend off a drop) and can essentially get away from any unit in the game with speed boost. The other changes I am willing to try playing with, but that medivac change is absurd.
On December 07 2012 03:57 TheRabidDeer wrote: I dont understand the medivac changes. Medivac drops were already brutal to deal with before, but now they heal twice as fast (remember how many lings it took to fend off a drop before? now lings will NEVER fend off a drop) and can essentially get away from any unit in the game with speed boost. The other changes I am willing to try playing with, but that medivac change is absurd.
Most games I watch, all the drops are slaughtered before they even get to damage a single drone.
On December 07 2012 01:43 Eufouria wrote: The medivac seems way too buffed. It seems like its a change designed to make bio more resistant to AoE damage so a bio army can actually engage late deathballs but its such a buff to early-mid game timings and drop play. Maybe if they turn it into a fusion core upgrade it can then be balanced around late game, which should be easier, although I still think it will probably make drop play too good.
It's not a buff to any early or mid game timings. The upgrade is on a tech lab which in itself negates any "timings" you could do with this because you:
a) won't have the medivac count for "timings" since no reactored starport b) you have to research the upgrade first
It's an upgrade geared towards making bio stronger in late game engagements, which was something Terran was lacking with bio vs Protoss/Zerg in Wings of Liberty.
Are you serious??? It has a free speed boost that lasts 8 seconds every 20 seconds... how is that not a buff?
Read what I wrote. I was responding to the healing rate caudeceus reactor upgrade. As for the speed booster, i agree with what a lot of people said that it should cost medivac energy for two reasons:
a) as a drawback to using the ability, it drains energy b) because they want to see drops be more viable, in late game TvP it's actually beneficial for medivacs to lose energy so they are not insta-gibbed by feedback.
On December 07 2012 03:57 TheRabidDeer wrote: I dont understand the medivac changes. Medivac drops were already brutal to deal with before, but now they heal twice as fast (remember how many lings it took to fend off a drop before? now lings will NEVER fend off a drop) and can essentially get away from any unit in the game with speed boost. The other changes I am willing to try playing with, but that medivac change is absurd.
Banelings would help a lot with this.
1) Have you seen korean terrans? They can kill off 5 banelings then just lift and lose nothing. Then they can harass some more by trying to drop single marines onto banelings. 2) Behind mineral lines you can position marines so that only 1 marine takes a baneling hit
Banelings havent been too great at dealing with drops in WoL, why would they be better in HotS?
On December 07 2012 01:43 Eufouria wrote: The medivac seems way too buffed. It seems like its a change designed to make bio more resistant to AoE damage so a bio army can actually engage late deathballs but its such a buff to early-mid game timings and drop play. Maybe if they turn it into a fusion core upgrade it can then be balanced around late game, which should be easier, although I still think it will probably make drop play too good.
It's not a buff to any early or mid game timings. The upgrade is on a tech lab which in itself negates any "timings" you could do with this because you:
a) won't have the medivac count for "timings" since no reactored starport b) you have to research the upgrade first
It's an upgrade geared towards making bio stronger in late game engagements, which was something Terran was lacking with bio vs Protoss/Zerg in Wings of Liberty.
Are you serious??? It has a free speed boost that lasts 8 seconds every 20 seconds... how is that not a buff?
Read what I wrote. I was responding to the healing rate caudeceus reactor upgrade. As for the speed booster, i agree with what a lot of people said that it should cost medivac energy for two reasons:
a) as a drawback to using the ability, it drains energy b) because they want to see drops be more viable, in late game TvP it's actually beneficial for medivacs to lose energy so they are not insta-gibbed by feedback.
Okay that's fair. An 80% free increase in speed and acceleration seems a bit ridiculous without a tradeoff.
On December 07 2012 03:57 TheRabidDeer wrote: I dont understand the medivac changes. Medivac drops were already brutal to deal with before, but now they heal twice as fast (remember how many lings it took to fend off a drop before? now lings will NEVER fend off a drop) and can essentially get away from any unit in the game with speed boost. The other changes I am willing to try playing with, but that medivac change is absurd.
Most games I watch, all the drops are slaughtered before they even get to damage a single drone.
Are these HotS games? Because I havent seen a WoL game where a medivac drop wasnt really cost efficient in a long time.
On December 07 2012 04:00 avilo wrote: Also, the new raven change is terrible for a multitude of reasons. a) seeker missile is still inaccessible as hell in real games where there's action back and forth b) single target damage means it's going to suck vs mass brood/corruptor/infestor balls
I've seen people comparing it to yamato...and it's quite obvious it's almost exactly the same. Raven honestly does not need any changes except making it a more accessible unit in terms of the time it takes to get it's abilities into play.
CORVID REACTOR INCREASE RAVEN START ENERGY TO 100.
Makes the raven accessible, waits 25 energy for seeker missile instead of 50, and raven has immediate use with a PDD or two auto turrets.
Adding a yamato cannon to the raven is a terrible idea -_-
only you could ask for more terran buffs after reading these patch notes
On December 07 2012 03:50 HardlyNever wrote: This sort of seems like they are taking the Dota approach to balance the game by making several key units pretty OP on all races, and hoping the OP balances out. I would expect quite a few balance patches following this, but I'm glad they are trying to REALLY shake up the game and make it feel like a new experience with a lot more options.
I'm glad Blizzard is being aggressive about this.
Why is that a good approach? I don't know how they can get good feedback about these changes, because SO much has changed at once?
I like them being radical, but why not address the design flaws? Why not take a look at warpgate again for example if you're showing such a willingness to improve the game radically?
I don't think there is a consensus on "design flaws." I don't personally think warp-gate is a design flaw, and I'd be sad to see it go. I think outright removing things would be bad, as that could upset a large number of people. I personally think the only "design flaw" is fungal growth rooting instead of slowing, but if they minimize the impact of that ability, then that is a step in the right direction (even changing it to the projectile helps with the skill gradient).
I think more people can agree on adding more options rather than removing existing ones. Sure, not everyone will be 100% happy, especially with a community as bitter and hyper-critical as this one, but adding options seems like a better approach then trying to tackle subjective "design flaws," from a developer point of view.
On December 07 2012 04:00 avilo wrote: Also, the new raven change is terrible for a multitude of reasons. a) seeker missile is still inaccessible as hell in real games where there's action back and forth b) single target damage means it's going to suck vs mass brood/corruptor/infestor balls
I've seen people comparing it to yamato...and it's quite obvious it's almost exactly the same. Raven honestly does not need any changes except making it a more accessible unit in terms of the time it takes to get it's abilities into play.
CORVID REACTOR INCREASE RAVEN START ENERGY TO 100.
Makes the raven accessible, waits 25 energy for seeker missile instead of 50, and raven has immediate use with a PDD or two auto turrets.
Adding a yamato cannon to the raven is a terrible idea -_-
only you could ask for more terran buffs after reading these patch notes
Where in my above post was i asking for buffs? I'm talking about the design of the unit. It's very bad right now that let's say you build 2 ravens, they pop out with 75 energy and are just sitting there useless in lategame. It takes ages to acquire 125 energy. I'm arguing that the raven should be made into a unit that's useful when you build it off the bat.
As for the "new seeker buff" it's not exactly a buff. It does single target damage, still requires that 125 energy, and is essentially exactly the same as a yamato cannon. It's very inaccessible, and when you do get access to it now it does no splash which makes infestor/brood/corruptor more difficult to deal with. That is just my analysis.
On December 07 2012 03:50 HardlyNever wrote: This sort of seems like they are taking the Dota approach to balance the game by making several key units pretty OP on all races, and hoping the OP balances out. I would expect quite a few balance patches following this, but I'm glad they are trying to REALLY shake up the game and make it feel like a new experience with a lot more options.
I'm glad Blizzard is being aggressive about this.
Why is that a good approach? I don't know how they can get good feedback about these changes, because SO much has changed at once?
I like them being radical, but why not address the design flaws? Why not take a look at warpgate again for example if you're showing such a willingness to improve the game radically?
I don't think there is a consensus on "design flaws." I don't personally think warp-gate is a design flaw, and I'd be sad to see it go. I think outright removing things would be bad, as that could upset a large number of people. I personally think the only "design flaw" is fungal growth rooting instead of slowing, but if they minimize the impact of that ability, then that is a step in the right direction (even changing it to the projectile helps with the skill gradient).
I think more people can agree on adding more options rather than removing existing ones. Sure, not everyone will be 100% happy, especially with a community as bitter and hyper-critical as this one, but adding options seems like a better approach then trying to tackle subjective "design flaws," from a developer point of view.
It's not hypercritical at all to want the base issues to be fixed.
From there, you could do lots of cool things, fix the foundations before you build the house
On December 07 2012 03:50 HardlyNever wrote: This sort of seems like they are taking the Dota approach to balance the game by making several key units pretty OP on all races, and hoping the OP balances out. I would expect quite a few balance patches following this, but I'm glad they are trying to REALLY shake up the game and make it feel like a new experience with a lot more options.
I'm glad Blizzard is being aggressive about this.
Why is that a good approach? I don't know how they can get good feedback about these changes, because SO much has changed at once?
I like them being radical, but why not address the design flaws? Why not take a look at warpgate again for example if you're showing such a willingness to improve the game radically?
I don't think there is a consensus on "design flaws." I don't personally think warp-gate is a design flaw, and I'd be sad to see it go. I think outright removing things would be bad, as that could upset a large number of people. I personally think the only "design flaw" is fungal growth rooting instead of slowing, but if they minimize the impact of that ability, then that is a step in the right direction (even changing it to the projectile helps with the skill gradient).
I think more people can agree on adding more options rather than removing existing ones. Sure, not everyone will be 100% happy, especially with a community as bitter and hyper-critical as this one, but adding options seems like a better approach then trying to tackle subjective "design flaws," from a developer point of view.
I agree with you, I believe it is a good thing to see more options than to remove options. It makes for more unpredictable game play, which would add to its watch-ability. Also, it keeps me playing! This patch has done lots of good and its a great step in the right direction imo.
On December 07 2012 01:43 Eufouria wrote: The medivac seems way too buffed. It seems like its a change designed to make bio more resistant to AoE damage so a bio army can actually engage late deathballs but its such a buff to early-mid game timings and drop play. Maybe if they turn it into a fusion core upgrade it can then be balanced around late game, which should be easier, although I still think it will probably make drop play too good.
It's not a buff to any early or mid game timings. The upgrade is on a tech lab which in itself negates any "timings" you could do with this because you:
a) won't have the medivac count for "timings" since no reactored starport b) you have to research the upgrade first
It's an upgrade geared towards making bio stronger in late game engagements, which was something Terran was lacking with bio vs Protoss/Zerg in Wings of Liberty.
Are you serious??? It has a free speed boost that lasts 8 seconds every 20 seconds... how is that not a buff?
I'm pretty sure he was only commenting on the healing upgrade, as that's the only thing eufouria talked about specifically.
Outside of the Ultralisk and Hydra changes I'm a sad Zerg player. The Medivac buff is gonna be ridiculous. Marine/tank/Medivac is going to be so retardedly strong mid game. Terrains with good micro will be able to negate bane kings relatively effectively and the buffed medivacs are going to make killing Marines with Zerglings a huge pain in the ass.
The Muta buff really does nothing to help against P or T. Phoenix is now even stronger against them not to mention with range upgrades they can even kite corruptors. And I sincerely doubt my .25 faster Mutas are going to make harassing Terrans any easier with Widow Mines, Turrets, marines, and Thors. Oooo My Mutas now get to the enemy's base a couple seconds earlier than before... Big whoop.
I'm guessing Zerg will go for Hydra/ling/bling compositions more now to deal with the Medivac changes mid game.
On December 07 2012 04:00 avilo wrote: Also, the new raven change is terrible for a multitude of reasons. a) seeker missile is still inaccessible as hell in real games where there's action back and forth b) single target damage means it's going to suck vs mass brood/corruptor/infestor balls
I've seen people comparing it to yamato...and it's quite obvious it's almost exactly the same. Raven honestly does not need any changes except making it a more accessible unit in terms of the time it takes to get it's abilities into play.
CORVID REACTOR INCREASE RAVEN START ENERGY TO 100.
Makes the raven accessible, waits 25 energy for seeker missile instead of 50, and raven has immediate use with a PDD or two auto turrets.
Adding a yamato cannon to the raven is a terrible idea -_-
only you could ask for more terran buffs after reading these patch notes
Where in my above post was i asking for buffs? I'm talking about the design of the unit. It's very bad right now that let's say you build 2 ravens, they pop out with 75 energy and are just sitting there useless in lategame. It takes ages to acquire 125 energy. I'm arguing that the raven should be made into a unit that's useful when you build it off the bat.
As for the "new seeker buff" it's not exactly a buff. It does single target damage, still requires that 125 energy, and is essentially exactly the same as a yamato cannon. It's very inaccessible, and when you do get access to it now it does no splash which makes infestor/brood/corruptor more difficult to deal with. That is just my analysis.
How is giving a unit yamato cannon with no upgrade required not a buff? Yea its a bit trickier to use but it also 1 shots corruptors and BL's thats pretty sick. 300 damage in single shot free ability? That sounds pretty kick ass to me!
Holly changes, Batman! Now that was a worthy patch!
Without testing properly, I agree with most of them. And with some others I have mixed feelings:
- Vehicle and ship upgrades combined seems too much for me, and considering thor's buff, mech can be very very strong right now. Instead, I would try to merge the armor upgrades and see what happens. But anyways, I think it's a step in the right direction.
- I don't know what to think about medivac changes. While it's good to encourage drops, 3/3 bio with buffed medivac support sound a little strong to me.
Anyways, I'm just theorycrafting here, we have to see how the new metagame evolves. Changes like this is always welcomed.
EPT
