EPTBeta Balance Update #11 (Jan 9, 2013) - Page 53
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
adovid
United States16 Posts
| ||
|
jackdr
Philippines85 Posts
would that make sense? got me thinking about colossi, which deals 30dmg total in an aoe, plus it's mobile, but costs much, could it be used as an argument for the change i'm thinking about? | ||
|
winsonsonho
Korea (South)143 Posts
On January 14 2013 17:37 drkcid wrote: Is anyone thinking that maybe the final version will have a mix of changes from every beta path? I mean maybe they are just making experiments and in the final version they will revert some changes ie: tempest upgrade, older version of hellbat, etc... Ya, also been thinking there's a chance of something like this happening.. They want to test mech > so they nerf bio > everyone plays mech > good for testing mech... It makes sense, but maybe its just coincidence. | ||
|
papaz
Sweden4149 Posts
On January 14 2013 01:46 Hider wrote: It does. DB promised us that they would fix mech tvp in HOTS. So he was pressured to do something. That was why I could predict he would make such a statement after this "weak balance patch that doesn't fix the fundemental problems". Now he can tell everyone that he has done his job, and he has a tons of potentital excuses ready to be used in interviews when people tells him that mech isn't as awesome as it was in BW. These are the typical words that makes Blizzard go quiet about the things they do which I agree is a good thing. No one promised anything. If anything it was promised it was that they will try their best to come up with a good solution for TvP. Also even if this patch may seem strange, that tank wasn't buffed, this is the way Blizzard (correctly) always approaches balance. You do one tiny change and test. The you do another tiny change and test. Rinse and repeat. This was the smallest amount of change they could do to the tank to see if this changes anything. If it doesn't change anything Blizzard will take another step. They will eventually get it right. | ||
|
Zahir
United States947 Posts
On January 14 2013 23:14 papaz wrote: These are the typical words that makes Blizzard go quiet about the things they do which I agree is a good thing. No one promised anything. If anything it was promised it was that they will try their best to come up with a good solution for TvP. Also even if this patch may seem strange, that tank wasn't buffed, this is the way Blizzard (correctly) always approaches balance. You do one tiny change and test. The you do another tiny change and test. Rinse and repeat. This was the smallest amount of change they could do to the tank to see if this changes anything. If it doesn't change anything Blizzard will take another step. They will eventually get it right. i dont know about all that as a design philosophy. i think whats limiting blizzard from making any bolder changes here is their desire not to effect tvz or tvt adversely. when they want to change something across all matchups, like improving toss stargate or shifting lategame zerg away from infestor/bl, they can aim high with their changes. in this case, though, it's difficult. in broodwar, mech was stronger against toss because of shields taking full damage from all damage types. this kind of balanced out the fact that toss units are bulky, and less effected by splash. in sc2, shields have no such vulnerability, and i believe that's part of why mech is just weaker against toss. it's hard to find a way to address this without doing something like tank bonus dmg against shield, which feels sloppy. my point is, i dont think this is just blizzard being patient and methodical. i think it's just a natural outcome of there being very few ways to improve mech exclusively against protoss, due to the shield factor, and the fact that immortals are a mech hard counter in the midgame. | ||
|
convention
United States622 Posts
On January 14 2013 20:55 adovid wrote: I have to agree with you on this. It will now be scary playing against either P(Z/T), since it is already extremely scary against PZ. P can do a blink-four gate with skipping the obs, and still be able to blink anywhere into your base. They can also do a four-gate with warpins on the high ground, which at least that strategy will be removed with no more high-ground warp-ins. I feel in both of those cases, if they just fixed the map pool it those strategies wouldn't be so bad.Concerned with the factory changes in 2v2 vi Stalker Tank. It was effective before now I am scared to play vs Protoss and Terran on the same team. For those wondering how bad the map pool is: some maps have shorter rush distances than steppes of war, other maps they can siege your main base from a spot that is closer to their base than your own base, some maps have 3 entrances into your base. Finally, on a vast majority of maps, if you take your natural expansion, you open up 2 additional attack paths. The end result is on basically every map, the game comes down to whose has the best all-in. Stalker-tank is one of the best, but it had the down-side of hitting late because of siege tech, so other all-ins usually hit before siege tech would finish. Now that glaring weakness is removed. | ||
|
summerloud
Austria1201 Posts
On January 14 2013 01:56 Excludos wrote: Eh..no. Lets not judge HoTS as a final product before its actually a final product shall we? Theres still a couple more potentially "big patches" + a new balance patch every week for another 3 months. except that its less than two months and there wont be a balance patch for every single week until release cuz the beta will prolly go down 1-2 weeks prior to release that leaves us at 5-6 balance patches realistically | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8278 Posts
On January 15 2013 01:34 summerloud wrote: except that its less than two months and there wont be a balance patch for every single week until release cuz the beta will prolly go down 1-2 weeks prior to release that leaves us at 5-6 balance patches realistically I'd say probably closer to 8 patches. No one has said that the beta have to go down for 2 weeks. Remember the servers are already online (altough a couple of days is still liklely). And thats 8 patches on which plenty of time to make mech, Op, Up, and viable. But yes, its 2 months not 3. My brain skipped for a second when I wrote that. | ||
|
willoc
Canada1530 Posts
On January 15 2013 01:46 Excludos wrote: I'd say probably closer to 8 patches. No one has said that the beta have to go down for 2 weeks. Remember the servers are already online (altough a couple of days is still liklely). And thats 8 patches on which plenty of time to make mech, Op, Up, and viable. But yes, its 2 months not 3. My brain skipped for a second when I wrote that. Every other blizzard beta has gone down at least 2 weeks before release. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On January 14 2013 23:31 Zahir wrote: i dont know about all that as a design philosophy. i think whats limiting blizzard from making any bolder changes here is their desire not to effect tvz or tvt adversely. when they want to change something across all matchups, like improving toss stargate or shifting lategame zerg away from infestor/bl, they can aim high with their changes. in this case, though, it's difficult. in broodwar, mech was stronger against toss because of shields taking full damage from all damage types. this kind of balanced out the fact that toss units are bulky, and less effected by splash. in sc2, shields have no such vulnerability, and i believe that's part of why mech is just weaker against toss. it's hard to find a way to address this without doing something like tank bonus dmg against shield, which feels sloppy. my point is, i dont think this is just blizzard being patient and methodical. i think it's just a natural outcome of there being very few ways to improve mech exclusively against protoss, due to the shield factor, and the fact that immortals are a mech hard counter in the midgame. Mech (Siege Tanks) isnt that great against Zerg either and they get abduct as a new anti-mech spell with HotS. So what is holding Blizzard back? Can't be TvT ... | ||
|
brudnychuj
9 Posts
| ||
|
Zahir
United States947 Posts
On January 15 2013 03:22 Rabiator wrote: Mech (Siege Tanks) isnt that great against Zerg either and they get abduct as a new anti-mech spell with HotS. So what is holding Blizzard back? Can't be TvT ... Marine tank pre hive push is good enough to be more or less standard vs Zerg, and tanks dominate Tvt until one person manages to tech to sky Terran. I still think there is room to buff tanks but it needs to be done carefully. For example, lets say they just give tanks 60 flat damage vs all types. Tank mech becomes the only viable mid-late game strat in Tvt, Pre hive timings are super powerful tvz and tvp is... Mostly unaffected as immortals deflect most of the damage until late late game. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On January 15 2013 04:23 Zahir wrote: Marine tank pre hive push is good enough to be more or less standard vs Zerg, and tanks dominate Tvt until one person manages to tech to sky Terran. I still think there is room to buff tanks but it needs to be done carefully. For example, lets say they just give tanks 60 flat damage vs all types. Tank mech becomes the only viable mid-late game strat in Tvt, Pre hive timings are super powerful tvz and tvp is... Mostly unaffected as immortals deflect most of the damage until late late game. I dont know ... you would have to change your playstyle, but those flat 60 damage are also dealt to Siege Tanks when an enemy stands next to them. You might still be able to do that with Marauders or even dropping them onto the tanks once the AA has been dealt with. The fact remains that the Siege Tank remains basically the only unit in the game which increases the risk of using it with higher damage. I would think you would basically HAVE TO put up bunkers in front of the tanks (plus some turrets) to make them safe from those melee attackers. Thus it isnt just the same "SC2 mech playstyle" (sieging-unsieging and moving on with the whole bunch all the time) as we see now but rather a totally different playstyle and much more immobile. I'd say it was at least worth a try, but it seems Browder doesnt want to do that ... and if they finally do it they will just give us five days - before anyone has a chance to get used to it - and then decide that "it doesnt change much" (like they did for the "dynamic unit movement") and take it out again. | ||
|
skurj
United States87 Posts
| ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On January 15 2013 17:02 skurj wrote: Guys OMG I just had a thought - what if slow from timewarp could stack? Please dont ... no more gimmicky spells because we already have enough of them. | ||
| ||
