|
Servers will be coming down at 17:00 PST to apply the patch
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=23094049316&postId=239769018323&sid=5000#6
General
* You can now report misconduct or block communication with a player after completion of a game by right-clicking on the offending player's name in the score screen and choosing Report Abuse or Block Communication.
* You can now view any player's profile after completion of a game by right-clicking on their name in the score screen and choosing View Profile.
* Updated unit and ability tooltips to be accurate in all regions.
* Improved the visibility of units on zerg creep.
* Improved the visibility of team colors for protoss units using warp-in to help distinguish between multiple protoss players.
* Improved the system that handles promotion and relegation between Leagues.
* Improved the Favored functionality to more accurately portray Even matches and display properly in the score screen.
* Improved 2v2 arranged team matchmaking so games are found more quickly.
* Improved replay functionality so missing maps will be downloaded from Battle.net when you view a replay.
* Korea: Improved the logic for the age gate functionality.
Balance Changes
* GENERAL
o Pathing has been improved so units can now properly block ramps and choke points.
o Made a change to how zerg creep affects doodads, such as trees, to prevent players from seeing the starting location of zerg players through the fog of war.
* TERRAN
o Viking
+ Cost changed from 125 Minerals and 100 Vespene Gas to 150 Minerals and 75 Vespene Gas.
o Ghost
+ Cost changed from 100 Minerals and 200 Vespene Gas to 150 Minerals and 150 Vespene Gas.
+ EMP Round radius decreased from 3 to 2.
o Factory
+ Cost decreased from 200 Minerals and 100 Vespene Gas to 150 Minerals and 100 Vespene Gas.
o Tech Lab
+ Cost decreased from 50 Minerals and 50 Vespene Gas to 50 Minerals and 25 Vespene Gas.
o Reactor
+ Build time increased from 25 seconds to 50 seconds.
o SCV
+ Life decreased from 60 to 45.
o Bunker
+ Build time decreased from 40 seconds to 30 seconds.
o Marine
+ Build time increased from 20 seconds to 25 seconds.
* PROTOSS
o Colossus
+ Thermal Lances damage decreased from 23 to 20.
o Observer
+ Cost increased from 25 Minerals and 75 Vespene Gas to 50 Minerals and 100 Vespene Gas.
+ Build time increased from 33 seconds to 40 seconds.
o Stalker
+ Particle Disruptors damage increased from 8 (+6 Armored) to 10 (+4 Armored).
+ Weapon upgrade damage decreased from +1 (+1 Armored) to +1 (+0 Armored).
o Dark Templar
+ Armor type changed from Biological-Psionic to Biological-Psionic-Light.
o High Templar
+ Armor type changed from Biological-Psionic to Biological-Psionic-Light.
o Dark Shrine
+ Build time increased from 80 seconds to 100 seconds.
+ Cost increased from 100 Minerals and 200 Vespene Gas to 100 Minerals and 250 Vespene Gas.
* ZERG
o Baneling
+ Volatile Burst damage increased from 15 (+20 Light) to 20 (+15 Light).
o Roach
+ Burrowed regeneration rate decreased from 10 to 5.
+ Upgraded burrowed regeneration bonus decreased from +20 to +10.
Bug Fixes
* Fixed an issue affecting the incorrect assignment of arranged teams to certain Leagues.
* Fixed an issue affecting random teams that caused no points being awarded on wins and too many points being removed on losses in certain situations.
* Fixed an issue involving the Bonus Pool display on the Quick Match and Leagues & Ladders pages.
* Korean client: Fixed an issue affecting the ability for Korean players to properly view profiles. They can now see their League ranking on their profile page.
* Fixed an intermittent UI crash on game shutdown.
* Polish client: Fixed a crash which would happen any time a "Player is no longer being revealed!" message was displayed.
|
|
|
Finally a buff for stalkers!
|
o SCV
+ Life decreased from 60 to 45.
nnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
I'm not sure exactly why, but this makes me really really sad.
|
Nerf's across the board.
...Nice stalker buff though.
|
Because marines really needed to take another 5 seconds to build?!
|
Whoa SCV life decrease
rockin my world wwowow
|
On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o Dark Templar
+ Armor type changed from Biological-Psionic to Biological-Psionic-Light.
o High Templar
+ Armor type changed from Biological-Psionic to Biological-Psionic-Light.
o Dark Shrine
+ Build time increased from 80 seconds to 100 seconds.
+ Cost increased from 100 Minerals and 200 Vespene Gas to 100 Minerals and 250 Vespene Gas.
Can someone tell me what the Light armor does (implications in-game)?
Also - why the nerf to the Dark Shrine...
|
WTF they just made DT even slower to get 
|
On March 26 2010 08:57 notrangerjoe wrote:nnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I'm not sure exactly why, but this makes me really really sad.
It makes me sad because most people still don't realize you can just attack move near a building in construction and the AI auto targets the scv. They are just as vulnerable in sc2 as they were in sc1, now they have 45 hp it will be really easy to harass them.
They should have fixed the AI to not prioritize workers
|
On March 26 2010 08:57 notrangerjoe wrote:nnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I'm not sure exactly why, but this makes me really really sad.
I actually had this exact same reaction. But maybe with a bit less n's
|
On March 26 2010 08:59 Antimage wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o Dark Templar
+ Armor type changed from Biological-Psionic to Biological-Psionic-Light.
o High Templar
+ Armor type changed from Biological-Psionic to Biological-Psionic-Light.
o Dark Shrine
+ Build time increased from 80 seconds to 100 seconds.
+ Cost increased from 100 Minerals and 200 Vespene Gas to 100 Minerals and 250 Vespene Gas.
Can someone tell me what the Light armor does (implications in-game)? Also - why the nerf to the Dark Shrine...
Units that do +Damage to Light now do additional damage to High and Dark Templars.
|
what? why make dark shrine even harder to get?
|
On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o Pathing has been improved so units can now properly block ramps and choke points.
WIN :D
|
"* Improved the visibility of units on zerg creep."
Very interesting, maybe everyone using low settings will switch to ultra now 
|
SCVs...
I find your lack of hitpoints... disturbing.
|
Nooo making reactor and marines take longer!!! And srsly now that I finally switch to T in sc2 they make scvs have only 45 life.
On the upside, P got kinda hurt too, except for stalkers. Also... why did they make dark shrine take longer and more expensive? Were there noob terrans in battle.net complaining about dt rush? Dts don't seem to used a ton anyway in my experience so far.
Did this patch JUST happen now I'm guessing? I just stopped playing and didn't notice these changes.
Also, force fields screw up pathing sometimes so units will just keep walking against it instead of going around it. It'd be nice if that were fixed.
|
WHAT?? SCVs are no longer 60 hp? This is blasphemy...
|
DT nerf, really? Who makes DTs?
|
-Thank you burrowed Roaches Nerf!
-Emp Nerg thank you
|
There's many changes that make absolutely no sence at all.
Nerf DTs, what? It might be the most underused unit in the game.
45 HP scvs?
Longer reactor build time? Hell, for 150 mins instead of 50/50, building a second barrack might become more viable in some circumstances.
|
On March 26 2010 08:59 Antimage wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o Dark Templar
+ Armor type changed from Biological-Psionic to Biological-Psionic-Light.
o High Templar
+ Armor type changed from Biological-Psionic to Biological-Psionic-Light.
o Dark Shrine
+ Build time increased from 80 seconds to 100 seconds.
+ Cost increased from 100 Minerals and 200 Vespene Gas to 100 Minerals and 250 Vespene Gas.
Can someone tell me what the Light armor does (implications in-game)?
Hellions now rape DT/HT.
|
On March 26 2010 08:59 Antimage wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o Dark Templar
+ Armor type changed from Biological-Psionic to Biological-Psionic-Light.
o High Templar
+ Armor type changed from Biological-Psionic to Biological-Psionic-Light.
o Dark Shrine
+ Build time increased from 80 seconds to 100 seconds.
+ Cost increased from 100 Minerals and 200 Vespene Gas to 100 Minerals and 250 Vespene Gas.
Can someone tell me what the Light armor does (implications in-game)? Also - why the nerf to the Dark Shrine...
Reapers/Banelings now do their full bonus damage against them. I guess they needed that because autocasting is very effective. I think there are other units with bonus damage to light as well...
Dark shrine build time was unnecessary I think, because DT's aren't used very often and the fact that they need another building to be created causes their utility to go down as well (as detection is more available.)
|
I like most of the changes but some are a bit weird
Like, baneling buff?
It will be interesting to see how Stalkers perform against Hydras and Mutalisk now though. It's a pretty big buff. Also, Collosi won't kill unupgraded marines in 1 hit now. That could be huge
|
On March 26 2010 08:58 sith wrote:
Nerf's across the board.
...Nice stalker buff though.
It's really not much of a buff. Stalkers will be better at stopping mutas and in the early game in general, but in the late game they will be weaker against armored units due to being less effected by upgrades.
|
On March 26 2010 09:03 lepape wrote:
There's many changes that make absolutely no sence at all.
Nerf DTs, what? It might be the most underused unit in the game.
45 HP scvs?
have you seen how ridiculous rine/scv all-ins are?
|
On March 26 2010 09:03 ShadowDrgn wrote:
DT nerf, really? Who makes DTs?
Yeah kind of the only change I did not like on the change list.
|
wow super nerfs everywhere! roaches have half the regen now too
|
On March 26 2010 08:57 notrangerjoe wrote:nnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I'm not sure exactly why, but this makes me really really sad.
Same. The reactor nerf also makes me cry, that totally raped one of my builds.
Like the bunker buff, they took too long completely.
MARINE + REACTOR NERF WTF NOOOOOOO T_T!!!
|
I would say they should make Dts more available. even move them back to templar tech. But i doubt that will happen
|
Mmmmmm cheaper factories and longer marine build times lead me to believe more super awesome early tank builds for TvT are on the way :D
|
nerf mutas!
Interesting changes...
|
Germany / USA16648 Posts
wtf would they make observers more expensive
|
Looks like SC2 Liquibition just got a hell of a lot more interesting (is that really possible?)! $300 for the pro-gamer that can analyze and maximize the benefits of this patch for their race.
|
This is a little bit confusing.
They just nerfed Terran and Protoss but BUFFED baneling damage.
Oh well I guess there's plenty of patches to go yet.
|
Upon looking at the changes further I do like that they seem to be decreasing the impact of the bonus damage. This is a step towards getting rid of the hard counters which aren't good.
But as has been said, I wonder why the dt nerf. I was originally wondering why the scv nerf but I guess the scv/rine rush thing is good, though I've never tried it.
It also seems like the terran changes somewhat encourage mech.
|
because they were too easy to get i think  ?
|
I guess this is their attempt at fixing the marine/scv rush in TvP. Balance issues aside, it's cool to see that they are actually reading this beta forum and listening to peoples ideas. I remember the thread talking about color problems in PvP , and the hassle you have to go through to see someones profile/ranking. goodjob blizzard!
|
Whaaaa?
Some very questionable changes here...
Why mess with Dark Shrine time/cost? Seems like a pretty huge nerf to me. I rarely see DT's in the first place, not sure why this needed to be done.
AND WTF THEY BUFFED BANELINGS??!?!?!?!?!
When are they going to buff Phoenixes???????
|
SCV NERF :D At last, terrans across the world will have to learn to play without having a bunch of deadly combat units spawned at the beginning of each game. Thank you blizzard, thank you so much.
|
On March 26 2010 09:02 Jonoman92 wrote:
Nooo making reactor and marines take longer!!! And srsly now that I finally switch to T in sc2 they make scvs have only 45 life.
On the upside, P got kinda hurt too, except for stalkers. Also... why did they make dark shrine take longer and more expensive? Were there noob terrans in battle.net complaining about dt rush? Dts don't seem to used a ton anyway in my experience so far.
Did this patch JUST happen now I'm guessing? I just stopped playing and didn't notice these changes.
Also, force fields screw up pathing sometimes so units will just keep walking against it instead of going around it. It'd be nice if that were fixed.
Newbie Zerg & Protoss players were actually complaining about DT's.
|
Jesus the SCV/Marine/Reactor nerfs are really pissing me off. Why the fuck did they have to do this omfg raaaaaaaaaage
|
Specific changes might not be that good, but there's something big here that's very promising. If we have units that deal A damage plus B vs whatever, some B damage has been moved to A. In other words, damage has been moved from contingent on armor type to base damage, which is undermining the hard counter problem a little. I hope we see more of that type of shift in future patches.
|
I honestly don't get the baneling buff. If anything they were overpowered, but certainly not underpowered. And I find it sad that they found no better solution than reducing SCV HP.
Weird changes in general though. Except for the ones that were expected like unit walls and stalker buff.
I love that observers aren't cheaper than overseers anymore. Seriously, Zerg with the most expensive detection was sooooo stupid.
Oh btw, with marine/reactor/SCV nerfs, and baneling buffs... I guess all the tvz fe build have to be designed anew from scratch.
|
Great changes to stalkers, roaches, EMP.
Kind of scratching my head over observers and dark templar and the baneling buff. I guess that Terran weren't staying in their base enough?
The change to SCVs is weird. I would have thought the increase to Marine/Reactor build time would have solved the early game cheese rush. I can't see a ton of purpose in using reactors on barracks now.
It's almost like they said "You want to use Mech? DAMN RIGHT YOU WILL USE MECH, BITCHES!"
|
United States17042 Posts
the blizzard people must be seeing something in the game that I don't understand...
|
why would they nerf DTs...
|
Obs cost even more gas T_T
Zerg barely got nurfed, this is bs.
|
United States47024 Posts
A lot of convention-breaking with respect to SC1. First the deviation in zealot stats, and now the change to factory cost, add-on cost, SCV HP and observer cost.
Obviously, balance is more important, but it hurts the nostalgia factor just a tiny bit.
On March 26 2010 09:04 Mastermind wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 08:58 sith wrote:
Nerf's across the board.
...Nice stalker buff though. It's really not much of a buff. Stalkers will be better at stopping mutas and in the early game in general, but in the late game they will be weaker against armored units due to being less effected by upgrades.
A good comparison to make is the Viking in patch 1. Even though on paper, the stats don't seem better, helping define the unit's role only helps make the unit stronger. Just like the pre-patch 1 Viking, the Stalker was a unit that did a lot of things pretty poorly. This should help people pin down a role for it as it got better at some things and worse at others.
|
while i like the stalker buff/collosus nerf - i think they changed costs/times pretty heavily and to the wrong stuff.
Reactor build time doubled? i really dislike that - and Dark shrine didn't need changing imo, that was abit odd.
My biggest gripe with this patch so far - Marine/reactor times increased (lol?) and baneling buffed.
Don't actually understand what the reasoning was behind the reactor increase (marine/scv rush was already nerfed vs protoss with longer marine time and 45 hp scvs) didn't even use reactors in this build.
Not too impressed.
|
I like most of these changes. I think Toss will be weak now, but i think overall, this is an improvement. They seem to be softening up some of the hard counters.
|
o SCV
+ Life decreased from 60 to 45.
so much for epic TvT's....
|
Canada5565 Posts
- Should be able to block communication with anyone, not just someone you played
- Protoss units needed a more distinct display of team colors in general, not just for warp-in
- Units can block ramps now!!
- Interested to see how zerg visibility on creep has been handled
- SCV life decreased. thank god.
- Bunker cost decreased: looks like they want terran using bunkers more (why not?)
- So many terran changes...
- Observers wayy too expensive now
- Stalkers got the much needed damage switch! (I thought weapons upgrade did the same thing for all units??)
- Have no idea what the HT / DT armor type change means
- Looks like DTs will become an even rarer phenomenon
- Blizz wants banelings to become more viable
|
Very good patch. emp radius decreased as well as stopping some of the early rushes with marines scvs and one marauder. Pretty surprised dts less buffed since the dark shrine already takes awhile to build but the best upgrade is the pathing so that units can block ramps easier. I cant even remember how many times i have had units "blocking" the ramp and mass lings run into my base.
|
On March 26 2010 09:11 HazMat wrote:
Obs cost even more gas T_T
Zerg barely got nurfed, this is bs.
Zerg isnt overpowered?
|
i was wondering about the obs cost increase too, but overseers are 50/100, and scanning hurts a lot, so i guess it's not irrational to make obs cost more
|
They are no longer scvs to me. 
|
On March 26 2010 09:03 lepape wrote:
45 HP scvs?
The AI of unfocused combat units values workers above other combat units.
A good illustration of them being used for combat is Day[9] Daily #87 (Jinro vs Lucifron)
Which is an epic cast that I am now going to watch again 8>
|
I think obs change is good
P were spoiled
|
I'm guessing the SCV / marines/ bunker changes have been made for balancing bunker rushes / rax proxies
|
On March 26 2010 09:10 Kralic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 09:02 Jonoman92 wrote:
Nooo making reactor and marines take longer!!! And srsly now that I finally switch to T in sc2 they make scvs have only 45 life.
On the upside, P got kinda hurt too, except for stalkers. Also... why did they make dark shrine take longer and more expensive? Were there noob terrans in battle.net complaining about dt rush? Dts don't seem to used a ton anyway in my experience so far.
Did this patch JUST happen now I'm guessing? I just stopped playing and didn't notice these changes.
Also, force fields screw up pathing sometimes so units will just keep walking against it instead of going around it. It'd be nice if that were fixed. Newbie Zerg & Protoss players were actually complaining about DT's.
Blizzard are actually balancing mainly based on their internal testing, I seriously doubt that they nerfed DT's based on newbie feedback.
|
o Dark Shrine
+ Build time increased from 80 seconds to 100 seconds.
+ Cost increased from 100 Minerals and 200 Vespene Gas to 100 Minerals and 250 Vespene Gas.
^^^ MWAAAHAHAHAAHAHA lol srsly xD
I find changes to observers, factory and SCVs offensive to SC1's legacy!
I don't understand reasoning behind collosi nerf, reactor and tech lab changes, baneling change (lolwut one!), obs, dark shrine, emp. Yes, i don't understand why they nerfed emp. If they want to nerf emp - remove feedback
On March 26 2010 09:16 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 09:10 Kralic wrote:On March 26 2010 09:02 Jonoman92 wrote:
Nooo making reactor and marines take longer!!! And srsly now that I finally switch to T in sc2 they make scvs have only 45 life.
On the upside, P got kinda hurt too, except for stalkers. Also... why did they make dark shrine take longer and more expensive? Were there noob terrans in battle.net complaining about dt rush? Dts don't seem to used a ton anyway in my experience so far.
Did this patch JUST happen now I'm guessing? I just stopped playing and didn't notice these changes.
Also, force fields screw up pathing sometimes so units will just keep walking against it instead of going around it. It'd be nice if that were fixed. Newbie Zerg & Protoss players were actually complaining about DT's. Blizzard are actually balancing mainly based on their internal testing, I seriously doubt that they nerfed DT's based on newbie feedback.
Everyone is a newbie vs David Kim!
|
On March 26 2010 09:12 TheYango wrote:A lot of convention-breaking with respect to SC1. First the deviation in zealot stats, and now the change to factory cost, add-on cost, SCV HP and observer cost. Obviously, balance is more important, but it hurts the nostalgia factor just a tiny bit. Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 09:04 Mastermind wrote:On March 26 2010 08:58 sith wrote:
Nerf's across the board.
...Nice stalker buff though. It's really not much of a buff. Stalkers will be better at stopping mutas and in the early game in general, but in the late game they will be weaker against armored units due to being less effected by upgrades. A good comparison to make is the Viking in patch 1. Even though on paper, the stats don't seem better, helping define the unit's role only helps make the unit stronger. Just like the pre-patch 1 Viking, the Stalker was a unit that did a lot of things pretty poorly. This should help people pin down a role for it as it got better at some things and worse at others.
Yes, stalkers will be a much better "glue" unit early on, which is kind of needed. Muta massing won't be so abusive vs protoss, and they won't be SO hard countered by marines and lings.
|
why the hell would they buff banelings? thats what drugs do to you!
they should also nerf storm radius if they nerf emp radius.
|
I'm gonna say that they suck for nerfing the colossus. But just because I play Protoss
I think that nerfing Terran together with Protoss makes me less weary about this patch than the last.
|
Not sure the reactor nerf needed to be so big but what the hey.
|
|
|
Canada5565 Posts
On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o Stalker
+ Particle Disruptors damage increased from 8 (+6 Armored) to 10 (+4 Armored).
+ Weapon upgrade damage decreased from +1 (+1 Armored) to +1 (+0 Armored).
Regarding the weapon upgrade damage, so +1 attack from the forge used to give stalkers +1*and*(+1 Armored) and now it only gives +1? or do they mean now it gives +1 and before it gave +1 armored? because I was under the impression that any upgrades you get are the same for all units and are just the generic +
|
United States4991 Posts
I can't imagine why they nerfed DTs.
Ob nerf seems painful too 
|
DTs can now one shot SCVs, thats why!
Seriously, I don't know.
|
Baa?21243 Posts
Yesssssss, 45 HP SCVs, yesssssss.
Roach nerf Q_Q
|
Alright some interesting patch changes.
Stalker damage change seems pretty cool and scv hp down yay.
Don't really mind about the colossus since I don't use them all that often (weird I know)
|
On March 26 2010 09:10 Pokebunny wrote:
Jesus the SCV/Marine/Reactor nerfs are really pissing me off. Why the fuck did they have to do this omfg raaaaaaaaaage
On the plus side, Colossi will now need 2 rounds to kill marines and 4 rounds to kill marauders, vs 1 and 3 before. Overall the terran changes will encourage and allow you to push to higher tier much faster.
|
DEAR GOD I HAVENT EVEN FINISHED READING YET AND THIS PATCH IS SEX
|
My first thought is that this seems terrible. How is Protoss supposed to play PvT when tech lab is cheaper (faster marauders), stalkers do the same damage vs marauders as they did before, ghost is cheaper, fact is cheaper, viking is less gas, dt is more expensive, colossus doesn't 1 shot kill stimmed rines anymore, obs is slower and more expensive, bunkers are faster.
The only thing they fixed is the rine/scv rush and the rest is exactly the opposite from what any top player expected.
|
United States4126 Posts
Is that seriously their answer to the scv rush?
|
The reason why they nerfed DTs was probably because they're going to become a LOT more powerful against SCVs this time around.
Dark Templar = 50 damage
SCV = 45 HP instead of 60 HP
I think Blizzard was just thinking ahead with this, although I'm still rather worried for the viability of DTs overall.
|
sc2 is down, they're patching it now
EDIT- If you don't know why they're nerfing SCVs, you don't play protoss =_=
|
On March 26 2010 09:19 Xxio wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o Stalker
+ Particle Disruptors damage increased from 8 (+6 Armored) to 10 (+4 Armored).
+ Weapon upgrade damage decreased from +1 (+1 Armored) to +1 (+0 Armored).
Regarding the weapon upgrade damage, so +1 attack from the forge used to give stalkers +1*and*(+1 Armored) and now it only gives +1? or do they mean now it gives +1 and before it gave +1 armored? because I was under the impression that any upgrades you get are the same for all units and are just the generic +
Yeah, before the patch Stalkers got +1 vs all, and +1 extra vs Armored, now just +1 vs all.
|
I am utterly confused by this patch.
|
im pretty sure the scv nerf is obviously their response to all in scv marine rushes vp and vz. Although they shaved bunker build time by 10 seconds.... that seems contradictory to me. I dont think thw combination of these two changes nerfs the all in scv rine rushes at all. if anything, it also encourages more bunker rushes.
does blizzards idea of raising terran win rates involve making them cheesier than they already are?
also, i think roach nerfs are interesting. that will help p in pvz but assrape roaches more than they already do in zvt. even easier maurader kills....
least they got like 75% of the patch right... but when will they learn that fucking up a unit thats rarely used (dt) WONT make it played MORE
|
Yet again a BEATIFUL patch by Blizzard.. the color of zerg units on creeps, the block issue, slight nerf on ghosts, slight buff on mech.., slightly nerfing infantry builds.
Really show they're listening and want more diversity.
|
What the heck? Not to sound like raged-nerd, but they made DT's even harder to get?
Stalker nerf was good though, though we'll have to just wait and see.
Roaches nerf seems also fine, SCV's got nerfed a little bit too much, they SHOULD HAVE been nerfed buy not that much, maybe like 5HP, but make them less priority targets so that units don't attack them and attack the enemies attacking units.
Improved zerg visibility on creep - I wonder how they did this.
|
On March 26 2010 09:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
My first thought is that this seems terrible. How is Protoss supposed to play PvT when tech lab is cheaper (faster marauders), stalkers do the same damage vs marauders as they did before, ghost is cheaper, fact is cheaper, viking is less gas, dt is more expensive, colossus doesn't 1 shot kill stimmed rines anymore, obs is slower and more expensive, bunkers are faster.
The only thing they fixed is the rine/scv rush and the rest is exactly the opposite from what any top player expected.
Wouldn't the timing for fast immortals still be enough to stop marauders with a sentry and a couple of stalkers?
|
NO GHOSTS GOT NERFED T_T
and scvs? really?
NERF THE ROACH + BROODLORDS ALREADY this is wtf, marines? and when were templar OP? when was dark shrine op? what is this?...
|
On March 26 2010 09:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:colossus doesn't 1 shot kill stimmed rines anymore
What?
Stimmed marine = 35 hp right? And colossus does 2x20?
|
I definitely like the direction they are going with the ghost changes.
Not sure about everything else as of yet :p
|
On March 26 2010 09:25 hugman wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 09:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:colossus doesn't 1 shot kill stimmed rines anymore What? Stimmed marine = 35 hp right? And colossus does 2x20?
45hp with the shield upgrade.
|
I play Terran and I approve these changes.™
|
Scv 60 -> 45 (This is just not Starcraft anymore..)
Reactor 25 -> 50 (would make it 25->40)
Baneling buff
Those three are not really understandable to me; All others are fine.
|
infinity21
Canada6683 Posts
On March 26 2010 09:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
My first thought is that this seems terrible. How is Protoss supposed to play PvT when tech lab is cheaper (faster marauders), stalkers do the same damage vs marauders as they did before, ghost is cheaper, fact is cheaper, viking is less gas, dt is more expensive, colossus doesn't 1 shot kill stimmed rines anymore, obs is slower and more expensive, bunkers are faster.
The only thing they fixed is the rine/scv rush and the rest is exactly the opposite from what any top player expected.
For what it's worth, the area of emp is now less than half of what it used to be for 75% of the gas cost.
|
I agree with most of the changes
SCVs should also have their attack speed decreased to that of probes and drones, so they all have the same dps.
I don't know why observers were nerfed, they were good as it is. Protoss needs observers since T and Z can easily deny probe scouts.
Stalkers are a bit more reasonable, but still not good enough. 14 damage to armored sucks. They still get destroyed by marauders, roaches, and hydras. Hopefully stalkers can at least take on marines now. I think that lowering the price of stalkers to 125/25 would be reasonable, and give them back +1 (+1 to armored). 20 dmg fully upgraded isn't powerful at all.
I don't get why they nerfed the dark shrine, like DTs are super late tech as it and u need a whole building just for them.
Overall, they need to give Protoss something. Colossi are no longer good since they can't 1 hit marines anymore. They have an ever harder time scouting now, and DTs are less practical than it already was.
|
OH MY GOSH. STALKER BUFF.
Alright then.
|
6 pool will be sweet vs your weak ass scv's.
|
On March 26 2010 09:25 hugman wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 09:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:colossus doesn't 1 shot kill stimmed rines anymore What? Stimmed marine = 35 hp right? And colossus does 2x20?
I assume he means with the shield.
|
On March 26 2010 09:21 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
My first thought is that this seems terrible. How is Protoss supposed to play PvT when tech lab is cheaper (faster marauders), stalkers do the same damage vs marauders as they did before, ghost is cheaper, fact is cheaper, viking is less gas, dt is more expensive, colossus doesn't 1 shot kill stimmed rines anymore, obs is slower and more expensive, bunkers are faster.
The only thing they fixed is the rine/scv rush and the rest is exactly the opposite from what any top player expected.
Not really they've done exactly what people expected.
They nerfed Terran early game and nerfed Protoss later in the game also weakening EMP.
|
I am confused as hell about this patch, massive nerfs all over place. Game will feel totaly different now in balance.
|
My knowledge of the game is small compared to most people here, but I just don't understand the Dark Templar changes. I had to think for a moment which unit that was because I hardly see them.
I like the Stalker change though.
Observer change popped out to me as a big deal. Aren't Observer's already really important to keep alive because of their 75 gas? Not so sure I like the increase there, but then again I'm a noob so who knows. Aren't they the only viable way to scout as probes get taken out relatively easily?
I like how they are trying to improve some visibility aspects. I really like:
Pathing has been improved so units can now properly block ramps and choke points.
|
WTF SCV ARE 45 HP WTFFFFF
Unit pathing fixed happy about that though
FK 45HP SCV T_______T
|
On March 26 2010 09:22 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
I am utterly confused by this patch.
you're not the only one Vic
|
On March 26 2010 09:28 ooni wrote:
WTF SCV ARE 45 HP WTFFFFF
Unit pathing fixed happy about that though
FK 45HP SCV T_______T
It should be easier to block with SCVs now though, so it's not all bad.
|
On March 26 2010 09:27 Klive5ive wrote:
Not really they've done exactly what people expected.
They nerfed Terran early game and nerfed Protoss later in the game also weakening EMP.
Improving bunkers and marauders is somehow nerfing Terran early game? Just because they fixed SCV/rine pushes doesn't mean they nerfed the Terran early game. Ghosts/Marauders come really early too.
|
Dominican Republic825 Posts
On March 26 2010 08:57 notrangerjoe wrote:nnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I'm not sure exactly why, but this makes me really really sad.
YEYYYYYYYYYYEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
|
is this a real patch because these changes seem retarded. way to ass rape protoss even more (and i play terran!)
|
Does anyone know if the ladder reset will take place during this downtime?
|
Terrible patch from a protoss point of view, why on earth would they nerf colossus and simultaneously buff TvP in almost every way?
|
woot nice changes, i really thought we were gonna have hostable replays when i saw the replay fix sentence beginning lol
|
What I want to know is... is the reset before us?
|
...
Either Blizzard developers are insanely smart, or retardedly stupid.
I don't get these changes at all, except the Terran mech buffs.
|
Everyone is missing the most important element: the fact that apparantly zerglings wont go thru units anymore to run past forge FE... fuck yes.
Also, dark shrine was nerfed probably due to the marine/scv nerf. they can now 1-hit scvs, which makes dark templars like twice as effective at harrassing terran early game, and dt rush was already quite effective against a terran.
obviously marine/scvs debuffs were incredibly needed, i hope they didnt go overboard tho =\
edit: collosus nerf is huge, they no longer 1-hit marines.
observer nerf is so wtf, i guess they thought protoss was scouting to cheeply for robo tech so decided to add that in there.
roach burrow nerf is massively needed, thank god.
stalkers may actually stand a chance against mutalisks now, although i dont see why they needed to nerf the upgrades...
|
sooo, does anyone think ZvZ will change because of this? maybe banelings more viable vs roach?(cant imagine that really but...)
|
On March 26 2010 09:31 Ftrunkz wrote:
Everyone is missing the most important element: the fact that apparantly zerglings wont go thru units anymore to run past forge FE... fuck yes.
Also, dark shrine was nerfed probably due to the marine/scv nerf. they can now 1-hit scvs, which makes dark templars like twice as effective at harrassing terran early game, and dt rush was already quite effective against a terran.
Yeah that's pretty big I used to lol at people blocking ramps with roaches just to see the speedlings run through them anyway.
|
the scv life nerf is funny but i don't quite get it.. other than the AI of units auto-targetting the workers first :O (they really need to change this -.-)
|
On March 26 2010 09:29 Bash wrote:
Terrible patch from a protoss point of view, why on earth would they nerf colossus and simultaneously buff TvP in almost every way?
Make Immortals more?
Marines will build slower, reactors take longer, and there will be more of an emphasis on armored units. Seems like the Immortal is going to be even more of a boss than it already is vs Terran.
|
While I think the stalker change is definitely a move in the right direction, I still don't think it's enough. So they are stronger vs marines, mutas, lings and hydras. They still get raped by roaches, marauders and probably hydras. Since their upgrades have become less effective, armored units will become more powerful against them as the game progresses. I really do think that the stalker needs more juice...
|
On March 26 2010 09:29 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 09:27 Klive5ive wrote:
Not really they've done exactly what people expected.
They nerfed Terran early game and nerfed Protoss later in the game also weakening EMP. Improving bunkers and marauders is somehow nerfing Terran early game? Just because they fixed SCV/rine pushes doesn't mean they nerfed the Terran early game. Ghosts/Marauders come really early too.
Its not the changes to Terran that are wrong; the cost changes are good and absolutely nothing wrong with them. Its the Protoss nerfs that worry me. Why the hell do they increase build time of the dark shrine for example.
The Colossi damage was fine, its a high tech unit that counters marine, so it should kill stimmed marines with one shot, nothing wrong with it...
Patch confuses me T_T .. Also Scvs 60-45 is... well-_-
|
wtf SCV hit points =[
glad they nerfed the roach regen rate
glad they nerfed the collosus damage and a couple other things as well.
everything else is meh
|
How does SCV looks compared to Drone and Probe now? Both has regen when SCV only 5 more HP, its too easy to kill now and it will lose 1v1 with drone or probe. I know SCV/rine allin was hard but men...
|
It was time roaches were nerfed though. I don't mind going against them but they are so cheap and 1 fk supply
|
On March 26 2010 09:33 anotherone wrote:
How does SCV looks compared to Drone and Probe now? Both has regen when SCV only 5 more HP, its too easy to kill now and it will lose 1v1 with drone or probe. I know SCV/rine allin was hard but men...
SCVs can be repaired AND healed by medivacs
|
|
|
Here are some basic thoughts about the changes.
PvT
Terrans have lost some of their early rushing ability, and cheese scv rushing.
Protoss have gained a big benefit with a smaller emp radius, I'll have to see how that looks on the screen.
The ops cost and build time coupled with the terrans factor speed increase and cheaper costs means terran may be able to pull tech switches before toss really has a handle on what's going on. Things like banshee rushes may be more viable.
The stalker change probably won't matter too much since mauraders still kill them pretty well. The collossus change is huge big against unupgraded marines, but not that critical against marines with the shield upgrade (and what terran isn't going to get shields knowing they will face collossus?)
Finally and what may now the biggest one, terrans may have a far more economic reason to kill an ops with a scan. 270 min to take out 100 gas of unit....disregarding the monstrous scouting advantage it provides will seem even more worth it. Toss may find their ops are more aggressively taken out.
This one is tough for me to call right now.
ZvT
Terrans have lost even more of the early game with stronger banelings and weaker marines. Vikings will be a better counter to Muta now with their redesigned cost, but I don't see a huge difference here unless terran suddenly start massing them (which is possible). And of course with slower marines, muta may be even stronger.
The roach nerf to me is a nonissue, I wasn't seeing a lot of aggressive roach regen in battle, it was mainly after battle healing. The roaches main strength is its high hp and damage.
Overall I think zerg came out ahead on this one.
PvZ
The new pathing (depending on how good it is) should make it easier for toss to hold their ramp, which on certain maps is quite difficult. Stalkers are also better against zerglings now (from 5 to 4 so a decent difference) and we will see if this unit become more viable.
Muta receive a fair nerf with stalkers better suited against them, we will see if dropping attacks from 16 to 13 to 12 (with 1st +1 upgrade) will make a big difference.
The collossus nerf is pretty strong in this matchup. Collossus are not nearly as good at killing hydra now (from 2 attacks to 3 attacks...and you need +2 upgrades to shift teh balance back) and that may be the killing blow in this matchup.
Overall I think zerg have come out stronger.
My big question mark is the DT change. DT just haven't been a factor in SCII right now. In the vast majority of replays I've watched where toss tried dts, they wound up losing. I can understand with the scv change they may become stronger, but I just don't see it at this point.
|
Colossus nerf followed by a bunch of tvp buff's makes me question blizzard's sanity
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
Oh look, 7 pages of idiots who haven't played the patch yet. Let me overreact and draw immediate conclusions. Locking for a few days.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
ROFL@Dark Templar nerfing. They really hate DTs or something.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
Unlocked - any radical claims or unsupported garbage will be met with an immediate nerf to the face.
|
double time for a freakin reactor?!
also this didnt really help terrans mech at all, just made the factory cheaper -__-;
and now scv's building buildings will get raped by probes and drones t.t
happy about the colossus though
|
On March 26 2010 09:01 InterWill wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o Pathing has been improved so units can now properly block ramps and choke points.
WIN :D
Yeah this is good news here! Maybe a roach can block a ling on a ramp now.
|
everything looks like a nerf... even stalkers. They should have kept their +1 armored dmg, not really sure that was a good idea to remove it seeing as their damage is the same vs armored as is. patch 5 stalkers are better vs roaches once you get an upgrade than patch 6.
Looks like zealots will still be needed early for them.
|
Colossus
* Thermal Lances damage decreased from 23 to 20.
Yayyy now terran bio will squash protoss even harder!
|
On March 26 2010 09:50 Kennigit wrote:
Unlocked - any radical claims or unsupported garbage will be met with an immediate nerf to the face.
*sits back and watches the show* 
ont: I don't have the beta, so I'm really just glad to see blizzard adressing unit visibility issues. It will be interesting to see how the other changes affects the game once the patch goes live though.
|
Why the hell did they nerf toss more? This is so retarted...
They nerfed DTS which is a unit I hardly use because of how expensive they are...
They nerfed observer costs... awesome now its even harder to scout with protoss.
They buffed stalker, finally now change everything else back!
|
how long does the patch usually take?
|
any idea when servers are going to be brought back up?
|
On March 26 2010 09:50 Kennigit wrote:
Unlocked - any radical claims or unsupported garbage will be met with an immediate nerf to the face.
nerf guns aren't supposed to hurt people!
i can understand everything but the rine time nerf. why blizzard!!!!???
|
On March 26 2010 09:52 starcraft911 wrote:
everything looks like a nerf... even stalkers. They should have kept their +1 armored dmg, not really sure that was a good idea to remove it seeing as their damage is the same vs armored as is. patch 5 stalkers are better vs roaches once you get an upgrade than patch 6.
Looks like zealots will still be needed early for them.
I think it's meant as a bufff to help protoss anti-air such as fighting off mutalisks.
|
Hrm.
Protoss has been nerfed every single patch, and I honestly cant understand the nerf to DT's and stuff like that when they already take way longer than SC1 to get.
However, I guess we will wait to see how this pans out. The nerfs to Protoss that I still havent goten used to are the increased build times for the major buildings and tech. The types of nerfs this time have been a lot different so it might not be all bad.
Its funny because I just recently made a 200 SCV vs 200 Probe vs 200 Drone video where the SCVs won with 108 left. Then of course they nerf it the day after T_T.
I love any patch though, cant wait to hop in and see how it shakes out.
Edit: Also, a lot of these changes are apparent they are from direct feedback of its fan base. This makes me a happy camper.
|
The changes are incredibly reasonable. In fact, I couldn't have hoped for better changes all around. I'm not going to go through them all, but the biggest change that no one has even mentioned is that Marines now 25 seconds instead of 20. One of the three races staple units takes 5 seconds longer to produce. And I don't even think this is a bad thing in the grand scope of things, and I'm a Terran player. This change, coupled with reduced colossus damage and increased survivability with bunkers, will only promote more careful and dynamic play. All these changes, really, promote more dynamic play. Well, I haven't encountered Dark Templars enough to comment on that, but who wants to see SCVs in every single battle? It made for interesting play, sure, but I don't think that would have been healthy for the game in the long run.
All in all, fantastic looking patch so far.
|
On March 26 2010 09:50 Kennigit wrote:
Unlocked - any radical claims or unsupported garbage will be met with an immediate nerf to the face.
Thank kennigit, i really think people need a place to discuss something this big, even if right now it is just complete theorycraft that is 90% wrong, its still good to have a place to discuss and vent about the new patch (especially since we cant even play it right now)
|
On March 26 2010 09:53 TheComeback wrote:
Why the hell did they nerf toss more? This is so retarted...
Must, resist, making, fun, of, you, for, spelling, retarded, wrong.
Gretorp brought up a good point. The more gas on obs + longer research time means later immortals. I wonder how this is going to work out with roaches not being nerfed much.
|
wow. no nerfs to zerg (the overpowered race) and more nerfs to toss (the weak race).. funny.
(im saying this as a zerg player, I know zerg is overpowered.)
btw; its good my video card didnt come in today I guess, since servers down, wouldnt be able to play =[
|
The general changes are great. The terran changes.. while odd.. (where's the mech buff?).. are okay. The protoss changes sound really dumb, I don't get why they continue to punish protoss every patch.
|
I am a little upset that the cost of a factory and the techlab have decreased... It is hard enough as a zerg to deal with hellion + banshee rush as fast as it is now... Now it is going to be even faster..
|
I figured out that now DTs can one hit SCVs!
|
On March 26 2010 09:52 RexFTW wrote:
Colossus
* Thermal Lances damage decreased from 23 to 20.
Yayyy now terran bio will squash protoss even harder!
But wait!
Since marine build time had been increased, that means less marines, which means collosi don't have to be so strong. Less marines also means Immortals become more viable, which rape marauders. Furthermore Ghosts have been nerfed so Immortals won't be completely destroyed by them :D
EDIT: But dark templar nerf, wtf??
|
Nerfing DTs doesn't make ANY sense :S
Hell, they need to do something spice DTs up. They're waaay too late in the game to have so little health. They should just give DTs an anti-air upgrade and solve Toss' AA problem.
|
Everything seemed reasonable in this patch... except: banelings now do 20+15. OHHHH man.
|
Maybe they nerfed DTs because they can one hit SCVs now
|
On March 26 2010 09:47 FrozenArbiter wrote:
ROFL@Dark Templar nerfing. They really hate DTs or something. I swear artosis is working with blizzard balancing department.
|
|
|
I like that stalkers got the changed damage so they do a little more damage to everything, but why change their upgraded damage vs armored to make it weaker? That means now stalkers are even more weak vs armored than they were prior to this patch. (when upgraded of course)
|
Can someone explain how those 25-50 additional starting gas and/or minerals will fix Terran?
|
need a few more nerf patches for protoss then IM coming for you Smuft!! :D
also... baneling buff is insane O_O
|
On March 26 2010 10:00 Dr.Frost wrote:
I like that stalkers got the changed damage so they do a little more damage to everything, but why change their upgraded damage vs armored to make it weaker? That means now stalkers are even more weak vs armored than they were prior to this patch. (when upgraded of course)
Blizzard is probably afraid that they would get too strong with blink later on.
|
Maybe they nerfed dts because they would be a lot more effective verses scv's now
|
I like everything in this patch, except the baneling buff. That just confuses me. Maybe its blizzard's way of forcing terrans to go mech?
|
I really like the general changes, all things we had asked for (the readability on creep, easy to look at your opponents stats, etc)
I'm not gonna theorize to much about what effect these changes this is gonna have, because most of them I didn't really expect, and I'll see how they turn out.
But:
The reactor nerf seems huge to me.
banelings are better against everything, and stay the same against light units, I don't really get the reasoning behind this. If they had made it better against everything, worse against light I would have understood it, it seems a bit weird on first glance.
I can already hear people whining about this, but imo is the reactor nerf a bigger deal in TvZ hellion openings.
The stalker buff didn't surprise me, it had to happen.
If the protoss spreads his army more out now (instead of the big attack move ball they all seems to be using) they will really lessen the effect of emp now imo because of the radius nerf.
|
I honestly think theres ways to nerf the scv cheese push without making them weaker vs everything throughout the whole game =/
buff turrets !
|
On March 26 2010 09:57 UmmTheHobo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 09:52 RexFTW wrote:
Colossus
* Thermal Lances damage decreased from 23 to 20.
Yayyy now terran bio will squash protoss even harder! But wait! Since marine build time had been increased, that means less marines, which means collosi don't have to be so strong. Less marines also means Immortals become more viable, which rape marauders. Furthermore Ghosts have been nerfed so Immortals won't be completely destroyed by them :D EDIT: But dark templar nerf, wtf??
immortals still get hard-countered by ghosts.... nerf on ghosts wont change that unless you are extremely good at spreading your immortals apart. EMP still does 100 shield, which is all the immortal has, not to mention ghosts are cheaper now.
I find it extremely interesting that Blizzard felt like they needed to apply 5 more nerfs to the weakest race is SC2.
and god that roach nerf was sooo needed. they used to recover HP faster than storm could deal damage >.>
|
Just an idea, maybe blizzard should also release a statement along side the patch notes in order for the starcraft community to have a better understanding of what is going through their heads. This will keep everyone from playing guessing games and auto complaining about everything.
On a side note, why kill DT's even more T_T...
|
Best Changes:
On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o SCV
+ Life decreased from 60 to 45.
This one speaks for itself with all the SCV rush variants that were overpowered
On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o Observer
+ Cost increased from 25 Minerals and 75 Vespene Gas to 50 Minerals and 100 Vespene Gas.
+ Build time increased from 33 seconds to 40 seconds.
Cloaking and detection are more expensive in SC2 than SC1, yet observer price remained the same and it doesn't require an observatory. Good change.
Worst Changes:
On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o Dark Shrine
+ Build time increased from 80 seconds to 100 seconds.
+ Cost increased from 100 Minerals and 200 Vespene Gas to 100 Minerals and 250 Vespene Gas.
DTs are not viable PvT at high levels except for the occasional surprise; you need all of your gas for units that effectively counter bio which DTs do not. PvZ I see no reason to make these more expensive and take longer. Horrible change.
On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o Baneling
+ Volatile Burst damage increased from 15 (+20 Light) to 20 (+15 Light).
Doesn't make this banelings more powerful vs terran where they are already extremely powerful? I guess it might make them come out a bit more often in ZvP but zerg seems to already have enough good options in ZvP. Hmmm...
|
Baneling buff is just so confusing
|
Why make tech lab cheaper? And why make Fac cheaper allowing EVEN FASTER tech to banshees? T is now clearly the strongest race in the game, and ZvT is gonna fucking suck even more now.
And no, the Baneling buff won't really cut it.
|
The server has been down for a long time now - maybe they'll do the reset too.
|
why make obs more expensive...-_-;
and which terran unit has detection ability? ??
|
the Stalker buff nullifies the silliness of patch 6..this may actually change the game a lot now (dt/scv relationships, marines/collosus, new stalker support vs hydras/roaches, zerg burrow/obs, terran scan vs delicate obs, etc)
*excited
|
I am confused by the buff to the factory but not the metal units ie the tank :\
|
How can blizzard POSSIBLY justify the DT nerf?
DT, Carrier, Mothership are the least used units in the game - lets make them fucking more useless. Great going.
|
So how long does it typically take before the servers are back up?
|
finally I can see some DT's raping the whole Terran-Eco ^_^
|
Early pushes with either fact-reactors or rax-react to punish greedy zergs will probably be alot less viable now. Given the build time is twice as long. Can't wait to see how the patch plays anyway.. especially with the new color changes to units on creep.
|
I have no problem with the increased marine build time, 5 seconds on the faster game speed isn't that big of a difference (it really comes out to like 2-3 seconds more - big deal). However, DOUBLING the reactor's build time.. seriously!? And reducing SCV HP by 25%!? Drone/probe harass is going to be such a nuisance now.
|
The only thing that balanced the otherwise ridiculously imbalanced TvP was nerfed to hell and back. No marine pressure, no slowing down the protoss' tech... This along with the baneling buff, expect to see terran win rates in the 30%'s...
|
On March 26 2010 10:04 zazen wrote:Why make tech lab cheaper? And why make Fac cheaper allowing EVEN FASTER tech to banshees? T is now clearly the strongest race in the game, and ZvT is gonna fucking suck even more now. And no, the Baneling buff won't really cut it.
How could you possibly imply that zvt is actually t favoured?
this patch has some good points, but overall it looks like noone in charge of balancing plays toss
its a good thing I was planning to switch to terran this week anyway
|
On March 26 2010 10:09 Senx wrote:
especially with the new color changes to units on creep.
I just hope they do a good enough job of fixing the problem. This is/was one of the main problems with the beta from an observer standpoint.
|
1. SCVs should have at least 50 health.
2. Why do roaches STILL have two fucking armor??
3. Thank you for making stalkers less suck.
4. Thank you for decreasing the gas cost of vikings.
5. DOUBLE reactor construction time?? ??? ????
|
you should put more question marks behind your questions to make your point more obvious imo.
2. Because blizzard thinks they are fine that way and nerfed something else about them instead wich they found to be in need of a nerf
|
Great patch for terrans I would say. The scv nerf is understandable but at the same time with all the other buffs there has to be some nerfs.
|
Everyone say it together:
This is beta. Blizzard is going to try things out and change things up on me. I will not take patch notes personally. I want the most competitive balanced game possible, and every attempt at change is getting us closer to that point, even if it's 2 steps forward in some spots and 1 step backwards in others.
I'm interested to see if it becomes more sensible to build additional Barracks over Reactors now. You save some gas and don't interrupt 2 Marines worth of build time from the first Barracks.
|
hey sorry kinda off topic but with the new patch coming, how many of u think the ladder reset will happen after battle.net comes back online?
|
Most of these changes make no sense. They didn't touch the bandaid (marauder/immortal) units at all. Their only reason for being so strong is so that they can deal with zerg's crutch unit the roach. Unfortunately this makes thors and tanks less effective than they should be. Cheaper tech lab, factory and ghost simply means units that are already heavily used will be used more, and units that aren't will be used even less. Faster banshee rush, cheaper marauders, cheaper and faster ghosts. Fewer hellions, tanks, thors. Banelings buffed and marines nerfed? Mutalisks are gonna tear shit up. Not even gonna comment on the dt nerf.
Kenniget... sigh. Loosen up on that trigger finger, son.
|
so slower marines and reactor, and garbage SCVs
Doesn't this just make mass Mutalisk happy?
|
i think its good that i picked zerg as my main last week ;D
|
Nerf to the face - That just made my day :D
Here's how many hits a Stalker will kill light units in post-patch (not regarding regeneration); note that this does not, in any way, depict how well it will actually perform (although relatively it will obviously perform better, without upgrades):
Protoss
Probe: 4 hits, compared to 5
Zealot: 17 hits, compared to 22 (K...)
Sentry: 9 hits, compared to 12 (Kk)
High Templar: 8 hits, compared to 10
Dark Templar: 14 hits, compared to 18 (you require additional detection)
Archon: 36 hits, compared to 45 (incredibly inaccurate, although the number of hits needed reduced by about 9)
Observer: 6 hits, compared to 8
Phoenix: 18 hits, compared to 23 (Pretty good, relatively speaking >.>)
Interceptor: 8 hits, compared to 10
Terran
SCV: 5 hits, compared to 8 (Woohoo!)
MULE: 6 hits, compared to 8
Marine (w/o Shield): 5 hits, compared to 6
Marine (with Shield): 6 hits, compared to 7
Stimmed Marine (w/o Shield): 4 hits, compared to 5
Stimmed Marine (with Shield): 5 hits, compared to 6
Reaper: 5 hits, compared to 7 (Definitely a Reaper counter)
Ghost: 10 hits, compared to 13 (With the EMP nerf, this might be viable)
Hellion: 9 hits, compared to 12 (Kewl)
Banshee: 13 hits, compared to 17 (wut)
Point Defense Drone: Absorbs 200 damage, compared to 160 (zomg nerf)
Zerg
Larva/Cocoon: Infinite hits, compared to infinite (nerf teh larvaz pl0x XD)
Drone: 4 hits, compared to 5
Queen: 20 hits, compared to 25 (queek! go queen harass w/ stakz?)
Zergling: 4 hits, compared to 5 (Yesh)
Baneling: 3 hits, compared to 4 (Moar yesh due to Baneling buff vs Armored...like the Stalker)
Hydralisk: 9 hits, compared to 12 (Much needed?)
Broodling: 3 hits, compared to 4 (Still not anti-Mustache Lord XD)
Changling: 1/2 hits, compared to 1 (just kidding)
Infested Terran: 5 hits, compared to 7
Mutalisk: 12 hits, compared to 15 (YAY)
|
On March 26 2010 10:03 Smuft wrote:Cloaking and detection are more expensive in SC2 than SC1, yet observer price remained the same and it doesn't require an observatory. Good change.
Doesn't make this banelings more powerful vs terran where they are already extremely powerful? I guess it might make them come out a bit more often in ZvP but zerg seems to already have enough good options in ZvP.
Totally agree with those 2 points...
On March 26 2010 10:04 zazen wrote:Why make tech lab cheaper? And why make Fac cheaper allowing EVEN FASTER tech to banshees? T is now clearly the strongest race in the game, and ZvT is gonna fucking suck even more now. And no, the Baneling buff won't really cut it.
what about the marine production time that got nerfed by times?? weren't marines at the core of any winning strategy against zergs?
...it's so easy to counter fast banshees (at least counter banshee harassment), it's not even funny
On March 26 2010 10:17 anch wrote:
so slower marines and reactor, and garbage SCVs
Doesn't this just make mass Mutalisk happy?
Yeah, very much, imo
although the vikings are a bit cheaper, so you can supplement teh marines a little better with those
|
Awesome patch. Best changes:
* Improved the visibility of units on zerg creep.
always a plus
* Improved the system that handles promotion and relegation between Leagues.
Been needed for a while. I'm interested in knowing how it works now.
o Pathing has been improved so units can now properly block ramps and choke points.
Also been needed for a while
+ EMP Round radius decreased from 3 to 2.
Ghosts were mega against toss
o SCV
+ Life decreased from 60 to 45.
The single BEST change of the patch. I never understood the logic behind scvs having 60 freaking HP! Especially now with Planetary fortress it was ridiculous. Workers shouldn't be tanks.
o Observer
+ Cost increased from 25 Minerals and 75 Vespene Gas to 50 Minerals and 100 Vespene Gas.
+ Build time increased from 33 seconds to 40 seconds.
Also something I love. Toss have been getting their obs out on me way early and for very little money. In Sc1 it didn't matter so much since zerg had detection all over their base but now we only ever build a very few detectors so it was way more powerful. Glad to see this change.
o Stalker
+ Particle Disruptors damage increased from 8 (+6 Armored) to 10 (+4 Armored).
+ Weapon upgrade damage decreased from +1 (+1 Armored) to +1 (+0 Armored).
And ofc, this will be nice for toss against muta. I don't think the armor bonus change will matter that much. Its not like stalkers before the patch were being used as the Protoss "muscle" in end game armies anyway. Who needs a good bonus to armored when you have immortals in your army?
Overall, amazing patch. I don't really care that much about the DT changes but I can see people's point about DTs not needing a nerf.
Awesome patch Blizz!
|
On March 26 2010 10:17 anch wrote:
so slower marines and reactor, and garbage SCVs
Doesn't this just make mass Mutalisk happy?
Muta's come out way later then the moment marines start coming out
It isn't a nerf to the, okay I know mutalisk will be coming soon, I better prepare.
It is a nerf to the, omg mutalisks in my base, quickly throw down some reactors and make some marines.
You will have to plan more ahead, but what real implications this patch is gonna have, we will see over the coming weeks.
|
On March 26 2010 10:15 PatandPat wrote:
hey sorry kinda off topic but with the new patch coming, how many of u think the ladder reset will happen after battle.net comes back online?
I'm guessing (and hoping) they will reset it. I'm really anxious to try out the new patch. 
|
i have had lots of success using DTs to take map control vs terran and then expoing. dunno how much this change will have on that. I thought having dts & HTs on different tech buildings was painful enough on its own but i guess blizzard thought differently.
slight stalker buff, doubt it will make to much difference.
|
On March 26 2010 10:03 NET wrote:
Just an idea, maybe blizzard should also release a statement along side the patch notes in order for the starcraft community to have a better understanding of what is going through their heads. This will keep everyone from playing guessing games and auto complaining about everything.
On a side note, why kill DT's even more T_T...
Very unlikely, that would only cause problems for Blizzard.
|
On March 26 2010 10:19 Savio wrote:Awesome patch. Best changes: always a plus Show nested quote + * Improved the system that handles promotion and relegation between Leagues.
Been needed for a while. I'm interested in knowing how it works now. Show nested quote +o Pathing has been improved so units can now properly block ramps and choke points.
Also been needed for a while Ghosts were mega against toss The single BEST change of the patch. I never understood the logic behind scvs having 60 freaking HP! Especially now with Planetary fortress it was ridiculous. Workers shouldn't be tanks. Show nested quote +o Observer
+ Cost increased from 25 Minerals and 75 Vespene Gas to 50 Minerals and 100 Vespene Gas.
+ Build time increased from 33 seconds to 40 seconds.
Also something I love. Toss have been getting their obs out on me way early and for very little money. In Sc1 it didn't matter so much since zerg had detection all over their base but now we only ever build a very few detectors so it was way more powerful. Glad to see this change. Show nested quote + o Stalker
+ Particle Disruptors damage increased from 8 (+6 Armored) to 10 (+4 Armored).
+ Weapon upgrade damage decreased from +1 (+1 Armored) to +1 (+0 Armored).
And ofc, this will be nice for toss against muta. I don't think the armor bonus change will matter that much. Its not like stalkers before the patch were being used as the Protoss "muscle" in end game armies anyway. Who needs a good bonus to armored when you have immortals in your army? Overall, amazing patch. I don't really care that much about the DT changes but I can see people's point about DTs not needing a nerf. Awesome patch Blizz!
SCVS got more HP because they don't regenerate. Yes, they can be repaired. YES, it costs minerals. So 60 -> 45 is too much of a nerf. And its not Starcraft this way
|
Mystlord
United States10264 Posts
I have nothing to say in this thread. It'll take a lot of testing to figure out exactly what all these changes do... Bah.
|
On March 26 2010 10:22 BC.KoRn wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 10:03 NET wrote:
Just an idea, maybe blizzard should also release a statement along side the patch notes in order for the starcraft community to have a better understanding of what is going through their heads. This will keep everyone from playing guessing games and auto complaining about everything.
On a side note, why kill DT's even more T_T... Very unlikely, that would only cause problems for Blizzard.
Why would it cause problems? I thought it was a good suggestion actually.
|
On March 26 2010 10:24 hifriend wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 10:22 BC.KoRn wrote:On March 26 2010 10:03 NET wrote:
Just an idea, maybe blizzard should also release a statement along side the patch notes in order for the starcraft community to have a better understanding of what is going through their heads. This will keep everyone from playing guessing games and auto complaining about everything.
On a side note, why kill DT's even more T_T... Very unlikely, that would only cause problems for Blizzard. Why would it cause problems? I thought it was a good suggestion actually.
I agree- if there was a logical flaw in their reasoning people could point it out too and help them shape the game the way the mass players/competitors want it instead of just the dev team.
|
FREEAGLELAND26781 Posts
What the nuts SCV?
Boxer must be frowning at this.
|
At least bunker rushes kinda stays the same.
-SCV:s weaker
-slower marine production
-faster bunker
|
SCVS got more HP because they don't regenerate. Yes, they can be repaired. YES, it costs minerals. So 60 -> 45 is too much of a nerf. And its not Starcraft this way
scvs had 60 hp in sc1 because they are vulnerable while building, had acceleration, and had shorter range than the other workers. they dont have either of the last two problems in sc2. 45 is a fair number imo.
|
On March 26 2010 10:03 Smuft wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o Observer
+ Cost increased from 25 Minerals and 75 Vespene Gas to 50 Minerals and 100 Vespene Gas.
+ Build time increased from 33 seconds to 40 seconds.
Cloaking and detection are more expensive in SC2 than SC1, yet observer price remained the same and it doesn't require an observatory. Good change.
I didn't think of this at all. Good point.
|
On March 26 2010 10:23 G.s)NarutO wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 10:19 Savio wrote:Awesome patch. Best changes: * Improved the visibility of units on zerg creep.
always a plus * Improved the system that handles promotion and relegation between Leagues.
Been needed for a while. I'm interested in knowing how it works now. o Pathing has been improved so units can now properly block ramps and choke points.
Also been needed for a while + EMP Round radius decreased from 3 to 2.
Ghosts were mega against toss o SCV
+ Life decreased from 60 to 45.
The single BEST change of the patch. I never understood the logic behind scvs having 60 freaking HP! Especially now with Planetary fortress it was ridiculous. Workers shouldn't be tanks. o Observer
+ Cost increased from 25 Minerals and 75 Vespene Gas to 50 Minerals and 100 Vespene Gas.
+ Build time increased from 33 seconds to 40 seconds.
Also something I love. Toss have been getting their obs out on me way early and for very little money. In Sc1 it didn't matter so much since zerg had detection all over their base but now we only ever build a very few detectors so it was way more powerful. Glad to see this change. o Stalker
+ Particle Disruptors damage increased from 8 (+6 Armored) to 10 (+4 Armored).
+ Weapon upgrade damage decreased from +1 (+1 Armored) to +1 (+0 Armored).
And ofc, this will be nice for toss against muta. I don't think the armor bonus change will matter that much. Its not like stalkers before the patch were being used as the Protoss "muscle" in end game armies anyway. Who needs a good bonus to armored when you have immortals in your army? Overall, amazing patch. I don't really care that much about the DT changes but I can see people's point about DTs not needing a nerf. Awesome patch Blizz! SCVS got more HP because they don't regenerate. Yes, they can be repaired. YES, it costs minerals. So 60 -> 45 is too much of a nerf. And its not Starcraft this way
Its not "Starcraft" if Terran doesn't have workers that pwn all other workers?
Also, I don't see why T's should be complaining about having killable workers. For 10 years we had a game where:
1. 1 probe could build an entire base in seconds, probes regenerated fast enough that they could harrass a drone trying to expo (while denying his expo) and sometimes kill it
2. SCVs did more damage and were tougher than any other worker
3. Drones could......only make 1 building.....ummm....have their expos blocked by annoying probes and SCVs....die to probes and scvs....and need to be made constantly since building a base = losing harvesting workers.
I think it is much better as it is.
|
On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o Stalker
+ Particle Disruptors damage increased from 8 (+6 Armored) to 10 (+4 Armored).
+ Weapon upgrade damage decreased from +1 (+1 Armored) to +1 (+0 Armored).
While this is a good start in terms of buffing the stalker, I feel stalkers still don't do enough damage. Considering their cost, their role, and their tech(getting blink for them is timely and expensive for such an important ability for the unit) they should do much more damage.
|
god this is is the worse patch so far. i generally agree with all the changes in the prev patches but some of the changes in this patch are terrible, or maybe i was expecting too much
toss anti-air / phoneixs not fixed still horrible vs mass muta
OBs more expensive wtf! TERRAN and zerg have "FREE" scouting!!
its not like toss have a free factory to lift up and scout around or instant free information thru scanning or expandable speed lings scouts or multiple overlord scouts around the map.
dt longer and more expensive wtf they arleady took so long
banelings better wtf! its VERY hard for p to fight roaches/lings/banelings early game
stalkers/immortals get owned by lings, zealots get owned by roaches/banelings
good points were:
stalkers buff was nice and needed
choke point /pathing fix was good - wonder how this plays out
toss still have a VERY hard time vs terrans early game M+Ms, and zerg muta ling
the difficulties in the MUs have not changed
|
|
|
They probably felt the scv w/ marine rush was too strong thats why they made marines slower to build and decreased scv hp from 60 to 45.
|
So...anybody have a mirror to this patch? My computer refuses to let me patch with the downloader >.> And it even shows patch notes for patch 5, even though I have it already.
|
Oh no the last patch before the game launches just came out!!...
oh wait...
Be a player not a designer. I welcome any change to the game that will bring new dynamics.
Wait.. buffing banelings...? No change to mutas? =X
|
Yeah that change is specifically to fix the anti-Protoss scv/marine rush
|
Im zerg, and im ok with this
|
btw hasnt anyone noticed the ravens auto turret lasts WAYYYYY too long?
|
LOL @: scv nerf
baneling buff
dark shrine nerf
thumbs up @: stalker "buff"
collosus nerf
roach nerf
emp nerf
|
Are the servers still down? Or am i having trouble getting it to patcH?
|
On March 26 2010 10:33 Zeke50100 wrote:
So...anybody have a mirror to this patch? My computer refuses to let me patch with the downloader >.> And it even shows patch notes for patch 5, even though I have it already.
Same
|
So is the server down for everyone else? I really want to play this new patch/
|
On March 26 2010 10:35 aLt)nirvana wrote:
btw hasnt anyone noticed the ravens auto turret lasts WAYYYYY too long?
Auto turret is great. And I play Zerg.
|
I think some people are having trouble with the patch and some people are getting on....
|
On March 26 2010 10:37 Megalisk wrote:
So is the server down for everyone else? I really want to play this new patch/
Still down, I am checking every 5 minutes lol.
|
On March 26 2010 10:31 aLt)nirvana wrote:
OBs more expensive wtf! TERRAN and zerg have "FREE" scouting!!
(
Sacrificing a MULE by scanning is free to you?
|
On March 26 2010 10:34 Kyouya wrote:Im zerg, and im ok with this
im not, no more lawling at protoss because speedlings were unbalanced
|
just play and stop complaining like little girls or make your own videogame =)
|
United States24682 Posts
For those of you having trouble patching... make sure you close sc2 rather than trying to log in without restarting.
|
I kind of agree with the obs. Really great, I felt protoss early free maphack is a bit overpowered. Scvs I felt were also a good nerf, but its sad to see them not retaining their original hp from sc1. I don't agree with the baneling nerf
The factory change perhaps is to promote more mech builds. Which is good :D
|
On March 26 2010 10:40 micronesia wrote:
For those of you having trouble patching... make sure you close sc2 rather than trying to log in without restarting.
So does that mean that the servers are back up now?
|
Baa?21243 Posts
On March 26 2010 10:31 aLt)nirvana wrote:
OBs more expensive wtf! TERRAN and zerg have "FREE" scouting!!
We do?
|
United States24682 Posts
On March 26 2010 10:41 Meepman wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 10:40 micronesia wrote:
For those of you having trouble patching... make sure you close sc2 rather than trying to log in without restarting. So does that mean that the servers are back up now?
Nah it seems as though you can patch but not log on... but at least my earlier advice makes sure you get the patch :p
|
Maybe it's a server reset as well i guess.... This is taking a long time
|
Well be happy that your not in the EU, it's another 15minutes before they even start taking down the servers to patch ;_;
|
Blizz has made changes in this patch that address promotion and relegation between leagues, improved "favored" match functionality, among other things. A ladder reset to take place with this patch would make a lot of sense.
|
Man it's so exciting every time they get a new patch on. Even if it's a weird, confused one like this. DT? Seriously? Kick the DT while its down? Anyways I was just thinking before I read the patch changes that the observer is probably one of the most important units for toss at this stage of the game. Scouting is pretty much everything at this point. And I always squeezed out a chrono boosted observer first but Blizzard seems to be on to me...
|
Go play the game with the changes before you start bitching people.
Blizzard doesn't just sit in an office thinking of how they can fuck with or troll the SC community and just put random shit together.
Every single one of those changes were for a reason and make sense on some level.
Btw, the scv nerf was necc considering how OP it was just to send a few SCVs with marines and auto-win half the time.
Also, people are blowing the baneling buff out of proportion. They added base dmg but took away from dmg to light units. Overall this makes them slightly better, but it's not like they just increased their overall dmg by a flat 5.
|
Canada5565 Posts
It's funny because I remember in one of the first patches the infestor got nerfed so hard when no one was giving it any attention and thought there were so many other problems. Even Day[9] was like, "wtf they nerfed the infestor?" and then sure enough it turns out the infestor was way too strong.
And now it's the DT nerf and baneling buff people are going "wtf" over heh
|
Reactor build time slows down the early double hellion harass.
Baneling might now been useful against roaches and murader.
Colossus now 3 shots a marine instead of 2, that might make things interesting.
|
There needs to be a widespread mass scv sacrifice until they get their 60 hp back. The 60 hp scv was balanced in terran early game because of how weak 1-2 marines were to rushes from P/Z.
|
On March 26 2010 10:31 aLt)nirvana wrote:
OBs more expensive wtf! TERRAN and zerg have "FREE" scouting!!
how exactly? by sacrificing 300 minerals for a scan or planting vulnerable `00 mineral overlords all over the map which dont even detect anymore? ^_~
|
no information for the reset ? damn :/
there is some strange change in this patch like the roach they nerfed an ability rarely used, but aniway w and see.
|
On March 26 2010 10:52 [Azn]Nada wrote:
There needs to be a widespread mass scv sacrifice until they get their 60 hp back. The 60 hp scv was balanced in terran early game because of how weak 1-2 marines were to rushes from P/Z.
Learn to block, and you will be just fine.
|
On March 26 2010 10:52 ShadowReaver wrote:
Reactor build time slows down the early double hellion harass.
Baneling might now been useful against roaches and murader.
Colossus now 3 shots a marine instead of 2, that might make things interesting.
actually it doesnt slow it down at all, it just makes it so u get less marines at first, because anyone with a brain going mech -> banshee or expo will just float fac onto barrack's reactor.
(double hellion harass = faster now lol)
Baneling buff doesnt make sense considering they were already pretty OP.
|
On March 26 2010 10:52 [Azn]Nada wrote:
There needs to be a widespread mass scv sacrifice until they get their 60 hp back. The 60 hp scv was balanced in terran early game because of how weak 1-2 marines were to rushes from P/Z.
I agree it is pretty hard for terran if the protoss or zerg decides to run into their base leaving their few marines and scvs open to attack from zealots and zerglings... If only someone could come up with a way to actually prevent the units from being able to get in....
|
They really should have just fixed the AI Targeting with SCV's and not nerfed the HP
More SCV kills on harsments , Less Harsment from the scouts, need more SCV to shoo off the other harvester scouts messing with your first Rax's or supply, Harvesters at Watch towers terran lose : (
Y did they not nerf all harvesters HP hope thats a miss type
|
On March 26 2010 10:56 Ftrunkz wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 10:52 [Azn]Nada wrote:
There needs to be a widespread mass scv sacrifice until they get their 60 hp back. The 60 hp scv was balanced in terran early game because of how weak 1-2 marines were to rushes from P/Z. I agree it is pretty hard for terran if the protoss or zerg decides to run into their base leaving their few marines and scvs open to attack from zealots and zerglings... If only someone could come up with a way to actually prevent the units from being able to get in....
And make Terran invincible to early rushes? That's crazy talk.
|
kinda lame that toss getting nerfed again. imho lower the colossus range not the dmg
|
On March 26 2010 10:54 dethrawr wrote:
actually it doesnt slow it down at all, it just makes it so u get less marines at first.
The B.O. is, rax, reactor, factory, lift off to reactor, double hellion.
|
I understand nerfing Terran infantry builds but WTF is with the baneling buff? It just boggles my mind.
|
Pretty good looking patch. Seriously though, reduced SCV hit points by 15 AND increased marine build time? Terrans are going to get raped by zergling rushes...
edit: How could I forget banelings? Just wow
|
On March 26 2010 10:58 StayFrosty wrote:
kinda lame that toss getting nerfed again. imho lower the colossus range not the dmg
ummm if you want but lower range would be even worse
|
After thinking through this and reading the changes over and over again, things are making a lot more sense.
It seems that this patch was created in Blizzard's attempt to shift around the meta game and to get players trying new things as this is an experimental period. For example, in PvT, the use of mass Colossi (which you see practically every game that doesn't end in the early-game) is now becoming highly discouraged now that they do less damage, you will likely see fewer marines, Vikings are now more viable, and factory tech is now faster. The SCV nerf was obviously to discourage those lame SCV rushes we see T do all of the time nowadays. The army change for DT/HT was probably made to promote units you don't see as often in late-game (i.e. Hellions).
Some changes were made to counter others - for example, although SCVs and Marines were both nerfed, bunkers were buffed so early aggression still might be viable. This series of changes makes perfect sense as the SCV will likely not survive as long so the bunker should be built faster.
I have a feeling that the game will play out very different after this patch - it seems to open up more options instead of giving the player a "correct" single way to play the game.
I think we'll be seeing more Immortal openings in PvT (instead of 1 gate Colossus) and much more muta/ling in TvZ at the very least.
The two changes I still cannot fathom for the life of me is the Dark Shrine nerf and Baneling buff...what is Blizzard thinking??? I can't help but to question what their basis for this change may be, seeing how I haven't seen a single DT in my about 160 games of ladder, and only twice out of 50-ish games of 2v2 (only from newbs). Also, why buff Banelings? They seem horribly powerful against T already...perhaps Blizz wants this unit to be more viable in the late game or used more widely in other matchups. Still these two changes (especially the DT nerf) is very questionable.
In the next patch I predict Mutas to be nerfed (to counter the heavy SCV/marine nerfs), Stalkers to be untouched (since mutas are now nerfed), and Blizz announcing the DT and Baneling changes to be early April fools jokes.
|
Vatican City State1650 Posts
What the fuck? SCVs having 60 hp was like, the classic of all classics. Why did they change it?
|
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO MY SUPER SCV'S NOOOOOOOOOO
|
On March 26 2010 09:11 Wintermute wrote:
Great changes to stalkers, roaches, EMP.
Kind of scratching my head over observers and dark templar and the baneling buff. I guess that Terran weren't staying in their base enough?
The change to SCVs is weird. I would have thought the increase to Marine/Reactor build time would have solved the early game cheese rush. I can't see a ton of purpose in using reactors on barracks now.
It's almost like they said "You want to use Mech? DAMN RIGHT YOU WILL USE MECH, BITCHES!"
Win post!!
|
On March 26 2010 10:58 StayFrosty wrote:
kinda lame that toss getting nerfed again. imho lower the colossus range not the dmg
agree
but overall doesnt look too bad.
|
On March 26 2010 11:03 orgolove wrote:
What the fuck? SCVs having 60 hp was like, the classic of all classics. Why did they change it?
I think the only reason was because of the Units attacking workers first, causing TvT battle to have mass SCV's in them... Which is retarded because if they wanted to fix this they could have just removed the "All units rape workers first" Mechanic.
|
I don't really mind most of the nerfs (although I don't really understand any of them besides the EMP nerf), but:
Baneling
Volatile Burst damage increased from 15 (+20 Light) to 20 (+15 Light).
Doesn't that make it.. the same damage to light total, but even better overall? I didn't know banelings were underpowered S:
|
Overall a pretty "interesting" patch in the fact I am quite curious to see how these changes affect the current in game strategies. The buff the baneling is something I am curious now to try out against non-light armies.
However... nerfing scv HP is pretty retarded imo. I am not looking forward to having my scvs harassed while building (as the only race who is subject to such harassment) since I play random.
|
Is it still down? I can't connect and want to be sure its not a problem on my end.
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
I don't get the SCV nerf. I went against a probe in a 1v1 to test out how fast and who would kill who. My SCV only just killed the probe without dying with like 10 hp left without any micro. We just set them to attack each other.
Now, the SCV won't be able to kill the probe. Also, I don't understand the marine up build time, It'll just mean we'll have an even harder time against zerg as we won't be able to pump enough marines fast enough to defend against ling/baneling all ins and other random ling stuff which we really need alot of marines to deal with.
Making factory cheaper,. Right, now where are making tanks cheaper or giving them some sort of buff to make the factory more useful? Yes, I understand the factory was a little expensive but I still probably won't end up building any units out of it other than the odd tank as they just are not worth it, and to be honest. I'm really enjoying Terran being able to go bio, it was kind of lame being stuck going mech in two matchups in Brood War when Bio is so much more fun.
I'm not complaining and Blizzard more than likely have their reasons, but I don't understand the Terran changes. I understand the ghost one and I like the tech lab change too.
|
|
|
I don't "agree" with all of the changes. However, I like that Blizzard is trying various things instead of just minor tweaks to very few units. The more changes the better as it brings us closer to true balance and finding out what works and what doesn't.
Rather than pre-emptively complain about every patch they're releasing in the beta, give it time to unfold and try out new strategies and timing windows that now become available. I know overreacting to every little thing is more exciting to read; but try not to shit your pants with anger over beta changes.
I do say that with a single caveat; baneling buff wtf?
|
The DT nerf could be a result of the SCV nerf; they can now OHKO SCVs, which is pretty significant. While you may think that they could have done it before because of OHKOing both Probes and Drones, you have to consider that Zerg and Protoss detection is more easily accessible than Terran, and at a less opportunity cost.
Banelings only seemed amazing because too many people went pure Marine + Medivac. Of course you'll think they're OP when you do just that >.> Banelings were TERRIBLE against Mech, and against Protoss' Robo units (along with Stalker, go figure). Not only does the Baneling buff make it better against armored units (which you may see as its only purposes), but it also encourages players to do different things (Immortals aren't the only choice as P, Roaches aren't the only choice for Z, MnMnM isn't necessarily the be-all, end-all for T, etc.)
Also, these changes imply that there is something we missed about these units; e.g, what exactly was powerful about the DT that Blizzard noticed, and not us? Well, we missed it.
|
It seems... They want us Terrans to tech. =)
I might kinda like this. I feel the SCV nerf is going to be annoying as hell, though.
|
It used to take 9 banelings to kill a marauder. That's 450/225 to kill one unit. I think blizzard just wanted them to be a little more cost efficient vs armored units. I think the DT nerf was an adjustment to the scv nerf because now they 1 shot scvs.
|
YES SCV NERF
Banelings are now even stronger though =.=
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
I really like the idea of teching as Terran, but I would kind of like them to allow us to go down both paths, rather than how Brood War ended up in certain matchups by making us go Mech as Marines were really weak against any kind of armour.
Still, Blizzard know what they're doing and it'll be interesting how I and other Terrans will be able to use this factory build cost buff. It'll allow us to tech to starport for medivacs faster atleast, either that or we may see more hellions come in to play.
In a way, I think they might be trying to force people down certain paths to see how it changes the meta game, then if something doesn't work, they'll just change back.
|
I'm a Zerg player, but I gotta say, that SCV hit seems pretty extreme... sorry, Terran players!
|
o Pathing has been improved so units can now properly block ramps and choke points.
NOOOOOOO no more speedling rush through the wall hehe
Great patch. Very satisfied with the changes.
|
Yeah I love this patch fuck terran XD marine rushes in 2v2's XD hehe.
|
Seems to me that Blizzard's main focus in this patch is to try to promote longer games. This patch dealt with a lot of stupid rushes like the marine/scv rush, double hellions are now built FASTER so that Dimaga baneling wall bust might just lose those precious few seconds to be that effective... marine/scv in tvt might also be no longer feasible since bunkers can now be built faster and scv's weaker.
Also keep in mind - Reactor build time used to be 40, not 25 (pre-patch 2). Seems like Blizzard doubled back on that decision...
|
On March 26 2010 10:12 machinus wrote:
1. SCVs should have at least 50 health.
anything less than 48 is completely pointless, as scv all-in rushes vs toss would have almost the exact same strength. 50 hp=4 hits from zeals, the exact same as a 60 hp zlot.
|
So, still no fix for the AI bug that makes units on attack-move stop at lowered supply depots?
|
SCV HP NERF YESSSS
REST OF TERRAN BUFFS WTFFF NOOOOOOOOOOO
omfg, how did they not touch the marauder at all. That fucker needs to be changed.
oh, damn instead of making zerg detection better, they made protoss detection on par. That still doesn't help zerg vs dark templar though.
The build time and cost of dark shrine helps a little..
nice, a stalker buff
The bling change i like, Seemed like they were too worthless versus anything other than marines.
wow the regen nerf on roaches is fucking huge. Now ling/muta might actually be more valid strat.
|
2 things to note:
1) this is a beta. the developer may throw some over-nerfs/over-buffs in to see how it effects the game. (when something is underpowered, it's far easier to balance the unit by OVER-buffing and then scaling back, then it is to 'guess the perfect number'. When you're CLOSE to that perfect number but not directly on the perfect number, it takes longer to uncover what's imbalanced).
It's similar with overpowered units. When a unit is overpowered, everyone makes it, and everyone makes a lot of it. They're skill with the unit will increase (regardless of its stats). By nerfing it harder than is needed (ie: getting it to a threshold where it's hard to use despite increased familiarity with it), you're better able to measure how far it needs to come back up.
2) none of you know what the fuck you're talking about. you cannot play ~1k matches of a game like Starcraft/Starcraft 2, and have any where close to the skill/experience needed to proximate a hypothesis. Hell, before Bisu came around, many people considered PvZ 'highly imbalanced'. I guarantee the likes of Nal_rA, Reach, and Kingdom were better at SC1 at that time than you are now at SC2. Give it some time. Your opinions are important, but put them forth with a bit of humility - take a moment to acknowledge how ignorant you are.
edit - i'd like to point out that i'm not speaking as a player who thinks he's better than you at sc2, but as a game developer who's been in the industry for 4 years - Balance Design in particular.
|
i'm pretty annoyed by baneling buff actually, the more i think about it - the less it makes sense, unless they want to appeal to the casual zerg players once more.
ZvT largely consisted of MMM + ravens/tanks vs ling/baneling/hydra/infestors
The fights consisted of marines getting fungal growthed, and being blown up (banelings running around the marauders, then clicking a+move onto the marines) - i automatically assumed that blizz recognised that the matchup was pretty tough for terran to handle.
Even without infestors, the zerg could attack+move the terran army, except the banelings and just hunt down the marines (if the marines pulled back, it would leave the marauders to fight the hydras, which would probaly leave the terran in a vulnerable state anyway).
Now, the way i see this nerf is - it means that banelings rather than having to avoid the marauder wall (it was the best way of beating zergs who a+moved - running the marines back and letting him blow up the marauders to prevent major losses, and only minor) it means that a+moving everything, including the banelings isn't half as ineffective. Personally i really dislike this change - it gives zerg less reason to micro in fights, but purely concentrate on where to fungal growth. The fact fights are becoming less micro orientated (yes, the baneling buff does decrease the need for micro) i am gradually becoming more skeptical of Blizzard's future plans with this game.
I don't believe the patch has looked at the right things - while yes the marine/scv rush was nerfed vs protoss, sure - i don't believe it's helped protoss at all. The more reliable Marauder expo strategy was buffed (less gas cost, faster starports) and stalker buffing won't make a difference vs marauder but will probaly be less effective (same damage vs armoured, 8+6 10+4, but less with upgrades) slower immortal, and more cost on observers. I can only see this further swaying the matchups in favour, of what they were already in favour of.
Protoss will lose to Terrans more frequently, and Terrans will further struggle vs Zergs.
Obviously my main gripe is with the Baneling buff, but also the reactor nerf (this wasn't even part of any of the "scv/rine rush"), personally it just feels as if blizz really want to remove all micro factors in this game, and just turn it into a a+move slugfest. Not impressed at all...
|
Sad that SCV's health went down, even though I play toss. The only think I don't like from the patch was increasing the cost of dark shrine and observers. That was just uncalled for.
|
On March 26 2010 11:14 Attica wrote:
It used to take 9 banelings to kill a marauder. That's 450/225 to kill one unit. I think blizzard just wanted them to be a little more cost efficient vs armored units. I think the DT nerf was an adjustment to the scv nerf because now they 1 shot scvs.
People keep saying that about the DT nerf, but that's not really how DT's work. Either you detect them and they're useless, or you don't and they kill everything you have. If you have a DT in your mineral line, who cares if they one or twoshot your workers, you're dead =P
Also: banelings do splash damage so that's not exactly a fair comparison. I don't think banelings should ever be "cost efficient" against armored units. If banelings were cost efficient against marauders AND marines then ..well damn =P. That being said marauders will still soak up alot of banelings so I'm hoping it won't make too much of a difference.
|
On March 26 2010 11:21 Feefee wrote:
If you have a DT in your mineral line, who cares if they one or twoshot your workers, you're dead =P
One shotting workers means you don't get alerts..
|
Seems clear this patch is designed to test early to mid TvP among a few other things. Very interesting.
It's not that they are afraid dark temps are suddenly becoming more powerful vs. terran, the race with the built-in always going to get scan option and cheapest tower/turret option. I mean in BW and SC2 Z and P always had to put up with Dark Templar threats and never had an uhoh button in a scan or a worker that yelled help in SC/BW b/c- it didn't one shot die. It is that they want to test certain things and want to take dark templars out of the picture for this patch.
I have a feeling, without Dark Templar as a quick (OK, not quick... zero) threat, they are looking if Protoss can manage vs Terran if they go non-robo tech. Or at least less dependent on robo. Then again immortals are still juicy... so I dunno. But the obvious dynamics that are changed/things they are testing:
a. Protoss don't have to worry about SCV/Marine rushes, but do have to worry about bunkers and/or marauders. This patch is testing zealot strength vs certain Terran builds and Marauder strength against all Protoss builds.
b. Protoss harass has a chance of killing workers who aren't 60 HP tanks. Colossi can still one shot drones/probes, but SCVs still take 2 shots, so it's not that. Blink harrass? Ummm... I can't see it happening but OK maybe in some insane build on the perfect map. Zealot/HT drop? Yeah, probably. Or just general drops with warp-ins.
c. Colossus can't one shot marines. So you may expect more High Templar play. They want to test if Protoss can genuinely advance to mid and/or late game by going mostly all gateway tech. The observer nerf (which is horrible IMO, Protoss always have the worst time scouting early and mid game) also decreases the urge to go Robo tech.
d. Just how strong Marauders are in general.
e. If Protoss can hang vs. Mutas with the new stalker. That's why no Phoenix buff. Yet.
f. If Zerg will use banelings more in general.
g. How good ghosts should be.
h. Terran mech builds.
Oh, and I called that SCV 45 HP change over a decade ago. More to the point I've been playing a ton of Terran lately in SC2, and I think that the drop is absolutely fine... even expected. The only thing bad that could come of the SCV nerf is if they really do die too easily while creating buildings. If so the fix should be that they aren't targetable when building, *except* when building bunkers, to avoid overpowered bunker rushes. Or hell take half damage while building non-bunkers... with the new fancy engine that should be easy. Although their repair speed has been nerfed so hugely from SC/BW, I'm not horribly worried about a bunker rush being overpowered at a glance. Except we still have salvage as Terran. -evil grin-
|
On March 26 2010 11:22 shruburb wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 11:21 Feefee wrote:
If you have a DT in your mineral line, who cares if they one or twoshot your workers, you're dead =P One shotting workers means you don't get alerts..
Even in SC2? Are you sure about that? Not that that would change in any way by a longer dark shrine build time either^^;
|
How is NonY still playing when its down? Or is it only down for certain areas still?
|
I M raging over the scv hp
tho factory cost is sweet for helliions those reactor is pretty uncalled for
|
On March 26 2010 11:21 Feefee wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 11:14 Attica wrote:
It used to take 9 banelings to kill a marauder. That's 450/225 to kill one unit. I think blizzard just wanted them to be a little more cost efficient vs armored units. I think the DT nerf was an adjustment to the scv nerf because now they 1 shot scvs. People keep saying that about the DT nerf, but that's not really how DT's work. Either you detect them and they're useless, or you don't and they kill everything you have. If you have a DT in your mineral line, who cares if they one or twoshot your workers, you're dead =P Also: banelings do splash damage so that's not exactly a fair comparison. I don't think banelings should ever be "cost efficient" against armored units. If banelings were cost efficient against marauders AND marines then ..well damn =P. That being said marauders will still soak up alot of banelings so I'm hoping it won't make too much of a difference.
1 hit from a DT can be huge. Let's say they get 4 hits off pre-patch before you pull away your SCVs, bring back your forces, and throw down a scan. That's 2 SCVs lost, + the SCVs lost during the action. Post-Patch, if they get 4 hits off, that's 4 SCVs dead. It kills TWICE as many SCVs before you can do something about it.
When looking at larger scales, it's even more noticable. What if they DT rush both your expansion and your main? What if multiple DTs are dropped, doubling the rate of attack?
As for banelings, you've got to admit they were absolutely terrible against Marauders. If you were using Marines and met Banelings, you could transition to Marauders relatively quickly, nullifying any further damage. With the buff, you can't do that without feeling SOME pain.
Also, look at it in conjunction with the Reactor build time increase; there will no longer be as many Marines on the field, reducing the Baneling's potential. The solution? Make it not absolutely suck against Marauders, which will be seen comparatively more than pre-patch, relative to Marines.
|
Reason SCV got less health is that they can be repaired. So now you all got what you wanted - more micro!
|
edit - that was not a constructive response. removing.
|
Can someone take a screenshot of units on Zerg creep when you're able? I'd like to see the difference. Thanks.
|
i love this patch, all the exact right things got patched.
gotta wonder tho.. how many bald people do they have on their balance team?
|
On March 26 2010 11:29 Zeke50100 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 11:21 Feefee wrote:On March 26 2010 11:14 Attica wrote:
It used to take 9 banelings to kill a marauder. That's 450/225 to kill one unit. I think blizzard just wanted them to be a little more cost efficient vs armored units. I think the DT nerf was an adjustment to the scv nerf because now they 1 shot scvs. People keep saying that about the DT nerf, but that's not really how DT's work. Either you detect them and they're useless, or you don't and they kill everything you have. If you have a DT in your mineral line, who cares if they one or twoshot your workers, you're dead =P Also: banelings do splash damage so that's not exactly a fair comparison. I don't think banelings should ever be "cost efficient" against armored units. If banelings were cost efficient against marauders AND marines then ..well damn =P. That being said marauders will still soak up alot of banelings so I'm hoping it won't make too much of a difference. 1 hit from a DT can be huge. Let's say they get 4 hits off pre-patch before you pull away your SCVs, bring back your forces, and throw down a scan. That's 2 SCVs lost, + the SCVs lost during the action. Post-Patch, if they get 4 hits off, that's 4 SCVs dead. It kills TWICE as many SCVs before you can do something about it. When looking at larger scales, it's even more noticable. What if they DT rush both your expansion and your main? What if multiple DTs are dropped, doubling the rate of attack? Marines.
Yes, I understand that DTs can kill workers twice as fast if they one-shot instead of two-shot.. they could do that if dark shrine build time was 5 minutes. The only thing a delayed dark shrine does is allow the opponent an easier time to notice the tech/get detection up, and it was already easy to spot DT's pre-patch. "DT's now 1shot SCVs" is still not in any way an explanation to delay DT tech.
|
o SCV
+ Life decreased from 60 to 45.
FINALLY a scv nerf, they were so OP amirite!?!??!
|
On March 26 2010 11:34 books wrote:
i love this patch, all the exact right things got patched.
gotta wonder tho.. how many bald people do they have on their balance team?
i don't get the joke.
and none of them are bald.
|
I remember having late game roaches with like 4 mutas on them when burrowed and the regen was so fast they couldn't even make a dent on him. I guess those days are over >_>
|
On March 26 2010 11:37 Mora wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 11:34 books wrote:
i love this patch, all the exact right things got patched.
gotta wonder tho.. how many bald people do they have on their balance team? i don't get the joke. and none of them are bald.
You are bald
|
On March 26 2010 09:34 Ideas wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 09:33 anotherone wrote:
How does SCV looks compared to Drone and Probe now? Both has regen when SCV only 5 more HP, its too easy to kill now and it will lose 1v1 with drone or probe. I know SCV/rine allin was hard but men... SCVs can be repaired AND healed by medivacs
And marines are really good at killing worker scouts early on. Zealots... not so much. And in general ranged units are much better at killing workers in oh crap base scenarios when workers have to fight at home. Early on, that meant Terran had an advantage. I still don't like zerglings chasing away early scouts so quick though... reduce their starting speed?
|
I love the reduced gas costs for Terran... the Baneling buff is scary. I want to believe but Blizzard is making it hard :|
|
its not april yet is it?
rip DT, we where able to become good friends but it seems our ways part here : (
also good luck to terrans vs zerg, with the marine/scv nerf i can imagine fast pool will be really reallystrong now
|
On March 26 2010 11:37 Mora wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 11:34 books wrote:
i love this patch, all the exact right things got patched.
gotta wonder tho.. how many bald people do they have on their balance team? i don't get the joke. and none of them are bald.
how do you know? do you work there? and also, u dont happen to have a beard would u?
|
On March 26 2010 11:45 Blacklizard wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 09:34 Ideas wrote:On March 26 2010 09:33 anotherone wrote:
How does SCV looks compared to Drone and Probe now? Both has regen when SCV only 5 more HP, its too easy to kill now and it will lose 1v1 with drone or probe. I know SCV/rine allin was hard but men... SCVs can be repaired AND healed by medivacs And marines are really good at killing worker scouts early on. Zealots... not so much. And in general ranged units are much better at killing workers in oh crap base scenarios when workers have to fight at home. Early on, that meant Terran had an advantage. I still don't like zerglings chasing away early scouts so quick though... reduce their starting speed?
most people get probes / drones into terran base long before the raz is up / rine and most times they will try and kill the SCV on the Rax or supply depo
|
On March 26 2010 11:40 BC.KoRn wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 11:37 Mora wrote:On March 26 2010 11:34 books wrote:
i love this patch, all the exact right things got patched.
gotta wonder tho.. how many bald people do they have on their balance team? i don't get the joke. and none of them are bald. You are bald
almost!
miss you baby.
|
On March 26 2010 11:47 books wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 11:37 Mora wrote:On March 26 2010 11:34 books wrote:
i love this patch, all the exact right things got patched.
gotta wonder tho.. how many bald people do they have on their balance team? i don't get the joke. and none of them are bald. how do you know? do you work there? and also, u dont happen to have a beard would u?
i worked with both of them for 2 years.
and yes, i have a beard.
|
On March 26 2010 09:16 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 09:10 Kralic wrote:On March 26 2010 09:02 Jonoman92 wrote:
Nooo making reactor and marines take longer!!! And srsly now that I finally switch to T in sc2 they make scvs have only 45 life.
On the upside, P got kinda hurt too, except for stalkers. Also... why did they make dark shrine take longer and more expensive? Were there noob terrans in battle.net complaining about dt rush? Dts don't seem to used a ton anyway in my experience so far.
Did this patch JUST happen now I'm guessing? I just stopped playing and didn't notice these changes.
Also, force fields screw up pathing sometimes so units will just keep walking against it instead of going around it. It'd be nice if that were fixed. Newbie Zerg & Protoss players were actually complaining about DT's. Blizzard are actually balancing mainly based on their internal testing, I seriously doubt that they nerfed DT's based on newbie feedback.
I gotta disagree with that one. After years of internal testing and going through all this trouble for beta, I think they are using game telemetry to make gameplay changes. It's standard practice now.
|
On March 26 2010 11:51 Sejong wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 09:16 Klockan3 wrote:On March 26 2010 09:10 Kralic wrote:On March 26 2010 09:02 Jonoman92 wrote:
Nooo making reactor and marines take longer!!! And srsly now that I finally switch to T in sc2 they make scvs have only 45 life.
On the upside, P got kinda hurt too, except for stalkers. Also... why did they make dark shrine take longer and more expensive? Were there noob terrans in battle.net complaining about dt rush? Dts don't seem to used a ton anyway in my experience so far.
Did this patch JUST happen now I'm guessing? I just stopped playing and didn't notice these changes.
Also, force fields screw up pathing sometimes so units will just keep walking against it instead of going around it. It'd be nice if that were fixed. Newbie Zerg & Protoss players were actually complaining about DT's. Blizzard are actually balancing mainly based on their internal testing, I seriously doubt that they nerfed DT's based on newbie feedback. I gotta disagree with that one. After years of internal testing and going through all this trouble for beta, I think they are using game telemetry to make gameplay changes. It's standard practice now.
standard by whom?
name 4 RTS developers who balance by this method.
edit - no, wait. wait.
Name 1.
|
On March 26 2010 10:50 On_Slaught wrote:
Blizzard doesn't just sit in an office thinking of how they can fuck with or troll the SC community and just put random shit together.
They might. It's almost APR 1st. You know blizz loves the apr fools jokes.
|
On March 26 2010 09:02 synapse wrote:
WHAT?? SCVs are no longer 60 hp? This is blasphemy...
the scv was like the iconic terran unit..
|
you guys are crazy, p >>> t in late game, the only reason t was winning against p was because they could abuse the early game and get a huge advantage
i hope that this patch fixes the imba scv/rine rush but i really dont think it helped T enough mid/late game T_T P gonna rape T now
|
On March 26 2010 11:58 arb wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 09:02 synapse wrote:
WHAT?? SCVs are no longer 60 hp? This is blasphemy... the scv was like the iconic terran unit..
They changed marines HP from 40 to 45 and you aren't complaining about that hahaha.
|
Marine build time increased? What the FUCK? Reactor nerf I can understand, and it won't effect me. I only get 1 reactor whole game for my port. Stupid bunkers, I don't want to use bunkers more often, stop forcing me to! Fact decrease is ok, ghosts and vikings cost less gas is nice, but all of that'll take some getting used to for sure. Scv hp decrease is depressing, I have to use scvs against ling all-ins all the time, and I had a chance of fending it off then. Good thing I can spam bunkers though, right? Too bad I can't fill them up as quickly so it doesn't matter.
Banelings more effective? I was anticipating a slight nerf.
I really dislike the dark shrine nerf. Not sure I like the obs nerf either.
|
On March 26 2010 12:02 Tinithor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 11:58 arb wrote:On March 26 2010 09:02 synapse wrote:
WHAT?? SCVs are no longer 60 hp? This is blasphemy... the scv was like the iconic terran unit.. They changed marines HP from 40 to 45 and you aren't complaining about that hahaha.
yeah but marines have more hp but idk why you would lower scv hp(something about that scv rush i think..) and im not really caught up as i dont have beta, but do dt's do 45 damage now?
|
On March 26 2010 12:05 arb wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 12:02 Tinithor wrote:On March 26 2010 11:58 arb wrote:On March 26 2010 09:02 synapse wrote:
WHAT?? SCVs are no longer 60 hp? This is blasphemy... the scv was like the iconic terran unit.. They changed marines HP from 40 to 45 and you aren't complaining about that hahaha. yeah but marines have more hp but idk why you would lower scv hp(something about that scv rush i think..) and im not really caught up as i dont have beta, but do dt's do 45 damage now?
55 DAMAGE :D
|
Blizzard needs to understand, it wasn't bunkers helping Terran turtle in SC1, it was the range on tanks. Bunkers were a toy of a building, maybe used once in a series of 5. Turrets are better Static defense as the only decent ground unit harass is a reaper.
|
Has anyone noticed the game loads slower after this patch?
|
Maybe these changes are to help them not be a 'toy' of a building in SC2, then?
There's no reason they should be punished or overlooked in SC2 based on their performance and uses in SC1.
|
Most hilarious bunch of patch notes I could have thought up, except for the Stalker change. Blizzard's totally missing the ball.
|
On March 26 2010 12:10 Kralic wrote:
Has anyone noticed the game loads slower after this patch?
Mine did. I got that little 400x100 banner on my desktop when SC2 was loading. Apparently this is normal, but before the patch I would never get it - I'm guessing because my shit would load fast enough before.
|
wow SCV HP decrease is really depressing for some reason
|
Im pretty happy with most of these changes. I don't think the radius nerf to EMP really does anything too relavent though, since you'll be making more ghosts anyway.
|
Everyone should be patient, who knows what undocumented changes they may have made.
|
On March 26 2010 12:13 Spartan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 12:10 Kralic wrote:
Has anyone noticed the game loads slower after this patch? Mine did. I got that little 400x100 banner on my desktop when SC2 was loading. Apparently this is normal, but before the patch I would never get it - I'm guessing because my shit would load fast enough before.
Yeah that is what I am getting, I literally thought I had to reinstall SCII because it was not loading, restarted my computer a few times, I found a SC2Switcher.exe (in the Support folder in the Starcraft II beta folder)that loaded it fast, not sure what the point of this executable is...
|
Marine build time increased? What the FUCK? Reactor nerf I can understand, and it won't effect me. I only get 1 reactor whole game for my port. Stupid bunkers, I don't want to use bunkers more often, stop forcing me to! Fact decrease is ok, ghosts and vikings cost less gas is nice, but all of that'll take some getting used to for sure. Scv hp decrease is depressing, I have to use scvs against ling all-ins all the time, and I had a chance of fending it off then. Good thing I can spam bunkers though, right? Too bad I can't fill them up as quickly so it doesn't matter.
Banelings more effective? I was anticipating a slight nerf.
I really dislike the dark shrine nerf. Not sure I like the obs nerf either.
I think this is because of a certain TvP cheese where T builds normal stuff in his base, denies your probe, goes fast reactor, proxies another 1-2 raxes with reactor, and hits you with like literally 25 marines before its possible to get collosus out.
As to the other changes, I think they fixed a lot of stuff. In a PvZ earlier today I went fe, had 4 cannons at my expo, expected the mass speedling he went for, and blocked my ramp with 35 probes(every single one from both expos lol) and the lings shoved them out of the way and ran into my main, losing like 5 lings.
Also, are rines two shot kills now with collosus after the collosus nerf? Because that combined with the cheaper buildings would make terran pretty buffed in TvP...
Only reason I can see for the DT nerf is because DTs were really imba in PvP, as they took more shots by an immortal than a zealot to kill, and did a shitton of damage.
|
On March 26 2010 12:15 Kralic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 12:13 Spartan wrote:On March 26 2010 12:10 Kralic wrote:
Has anyone noticed the game loads slower after this patch? Mine did. I got that little 400x100 banner on my desktop when SC2 was loading. Apparently this is normal, but before the patch I would never get it - I'm guessing because my shit would load fast enough before. Yeah that is what I am getting, I literally thought I had to reinstall SCII because it was not loading, restarted my computer a few times, I found a SC2Switcher.exe (in the Support folder in the Starcraft II beta folder)that loaded it fast, not sure what the point of this executable is...
takes me maybe 15 seconds for it to launch. I think it's just because servers are down though.
|
On March 26 2010 12:07 Lz wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 12:05 arb wrote:On March 26 2010 12:02 Tinithor wrote:On March 26 2010 11:58 arb wrote:On March 26 2010 09:02 synapse wrote:
WHAT?? SCVs are no longer 60 hp? This is blasphemy... the scv was like the iconic terran unit.. They changed marines HP from 40 to 45 and you aren't complaining about that hahaha. yeah but marines have more hp but idk why you would lower scv hp(something about that scv rush i think..) and im not really caught up as i dont have beta, but do dt's do 45 damage now? 55 DAMAGE :D
r u for rela
|
Instead of making probes more expensive, they should bring back the observatory.
|
On March 26 2010 12:17 arb wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 12:07 Lz wrote:On March 26 2010 12:05 arb wrote:On March 26 2010 12:02 Tinithor wrote:On March 26 2010 11:58 arb wrote:On March 26 2010 09:02 synapse wrote:
WHAT?? SCVs are no longer 60 hp? This is blasphemy... the scv was like the iconic terran unit.. They changed marines HP from 40 to 45 and you aren't complaining about that hahaha. yeah but marines have more hp but idk why you would lower scv hp(something about that scv rush i think..) and im not really caught up as i dont have beta, but do dt's do 45 damage now? 55 DAMAGE :D r u for rela
Thus the DT nerf?
|
I'm reaaaally depressed about the SCV health thing... I predict a 500% increase in casualties from probe harass in the coming weeks. SCVs don't even have a ranged attack! they are now the weakest worker T_____T
|
On March 26 2010 12:16 Kletus wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 12:15 Kralic wrote:On March 26 2010 12:13 Spartan wrote:On March 26 2010 12:10 Kralic wrote:
Has anyone noticed the game loads slower after this patch? Mine did. I got that little 400x100 banner on my desktop when SC2 was loading. Apparently this is normal, but before the patch I would never get it - I'm guessing because my shit would load fast enough before. Yeah that is what I am getting, I literally thought I had to reinstall SCII because it was not loading, restarted my computer a few times, I found a SC2Switcher.exe (in the Support folder in the Starcraft II beta folder)that loaded it fast, not sure what the point of this executable is... takes me maybe 15 seconds for it to launch. I think it's just because servers are down though.
Yes whenever you launch the SC2 executable I think it does a server check, if the servers are down it will try reconnecting several times before it finally shows you the login screen.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
The scv nerf was obviously a result of them being like mobile suit gundams and being the staple unit of every terran attack :p .
|
60 hp scv's is holy ground... how dare they touch it
|
On March 26 2010 12:18 Kralic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 12:17 arb wrote:On March 26 2010 12:07 Lz wrote:On March 26 2010 12:05 arb wrote:On March 26 2010 12:02 Tinithor wrote:On March 26 2010 11:58 arb wrote:On March 26 2010 09:02 synapse wrote:
WHAT?? SCVs are no longer 60 hp? This is blasphemy... the scv was like the iconic terran unit.. They changed marines HP from 40 to 45 and you aren't complaining about that hahaha. yeah but marines have more hp but idk why you would lower scv hp(something about that scv rush i think..) and im not really caught up as i dont have beta, but do dt's do 45 damage now? 55 DAMAGE :D r u for rela Thus the DT nerf?
haha without beta i thought they still did 40.
do you think this will mean that mid game dt harass(much like against zerg in sc1) will be incredibly viable against terran?
|
On March 26 2010 12:20 Dionyseus wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 12:16 Kletus wrote:On March 26 2010 12:15 Kralic wrote:On March 26 2010 12:13 Spartan wrote:On March 26 2010 12:10 Kralic wrote:
Has anyone noticed the game loads slower after this patch? Mine did. I got that little 400x100 banner on my desktop when SC2 was loading. Apparently this is normal, but before the patch I would never get it - I'm guessing because my shit would load fast enough before. Yeah that is what I am getting, I literally thought I had to reinstall SCII because it was not loading, restarted my computer a few times, I found a SC2Switcher.exe (in the Support folder in the Starcraft II beta folder)that loaded it fast, not sure what the point of this executable is... takes me maybe 15 seconds for it to launch. I think it's just because servers are down though. Yes whenever you launch the SC2 executable I think it does a server check, if the servers are down it will try reconnecting several times before it finally shows you the login screen.
Thought so, thats why when it finally launches I get a "Cannot connect to servers" message 2 times in a row without even clicking the "connect" button.
|
lack of roach armor reduction makes me unhappy
|
So when is it going to be up =[
|
On March 26 2010 12:29 Hawk wrote:
So when is it going to be up =[
|
mmm I reinstalled but can't get past v 0.4.0...
I have no idea what is going on but the server are still down right ? nobody can log in ?
|
On March 26 2010 12:30 Drakan wrote:
mmm I reinstalled but can't get past v 0.4.0...
I have no idea what is going on but the server are still down right ? nobody can log in ?
nope us is down eu is still up
|
could someone host the patch 6 file? I've ran every possible solution to fix the tracker download (stops at 50% then says tracker not responding), but to no avail.... nadda.
Thanks in advance for any headway on this.
|
I think the Jinro vs Lucifron game in the ZOTAC4 tournament was the end of the 60 HP SCV.
They played like a high-level 30 minute game that consisted of nothing but SCVs, Marines and Marauders against each other.
I had to call that style 'Soviet Terran' since it was all about sending the peasants off to the front line to die over and over again.
|
No......Sc2......
I died inside when i saw that the reset was confirmed, but servers were still dead.
|
I'm not sure why people are complaining about banelings. They are no better or worse against marines/zealots, and they are only slightly better against other units they are still useless against. It still takes 9 baneling hits to kill a marauder, and 8 to kill a stalker. It might just barely be cost efficient against stalkers, but they suffer losses on approach. I don't think baneling use is going to change very much.
As for the stalker upgrade, that's going to be serious. I don't think people realize what a huge thing that is. Mutas are like my goto unit, but now they will die a whole lot faster in that matchup.
They are also more usable for harass since four of them one shot a worker (5 for scv, down from 8!), and they still have the blink option available which I think will see more use soon.
The roach regen downgrade my affect zvz a little. I don't see many roaches get burrow, but usually when they do get it it is to defeat muta builds. Now mutas will be more capable of picking off burrowed roaches. I still don't think it will change the matchup very much. Banelings might see a bit more use against hydra/roach now, but I doubt it.
I was hoping for some infestor changes, sigh. Maybe next patch.
|
While I admit that the DTs changes have made it far too weak, at least they can 1-shot SCVs now.
I like the terran changes since it'll reduce the effectiveness of proxies and reactor-based rushes, encourage factory play and expansions. It makes terran less of a micro fest with marines and SCVs and reduces the imba of hellions, both of which was needed IMO.
I found the baneling changes to be pretty retarded though.
|
I still don't know how to deal with CharlieMurphy's "Mustaches" brood lords still gonna be able to kill me :/
|
On March 26 2010 12:30 Drakan wrote:
mmm I reinstalled but can't get past v 0.4.0...
I have no idea what is going on but the server are still down right ? nobody can log in ?
yeah its still down sir.
|
SCV -25% HP nerf... is this exagerate ?
so i guess hellions is now the official terran counter for DT ?
|
The main reason that SCVs had 60hp is that they have to run around outside and build while the other workers aren't exposed to attack when 'building'.
I think a better fix would be to give SCVs a longer attack cooldown to balance it out with the other workers and change the unit priority points so that workers aren't the highest. (Serious wtf as to why this has even happened, workers should be the last to get auto targeted)
Either that or make the SCV have 40hp and 'go inside' while building so they can't be targeted.
I'd rather have the Factory units changed up a little more than the Factory itself.
Reactor change seems a little harsh.
Stalker buff was okay, but it could be a little better. Something like 10/5 +1/1
I think bringing the Obs bay would be better than the nerf to the Obs. It would push back timing on Obs but make having more of them cheaper. Robobay as it is has the most units to make without requiring any addons/tech buildings to make more.
Dark shrine could be removed at making the Templar archives take longer or more expensive. The tech split is sad. DT's already cost more than SC as it is.
I like the change to the Roach.
Can't say much about the other balance changes other than they look pretty good.
|
On March 26 2010 12:44 j4vz wrote:
SCV -25% HP nerf... is this exagerate ?
so i guess hellions is now the official terran counter for DT ?
Hellion is the official counter to nothing, except maybe a counter to the terran-using-the-hellion's success.
|
So there was never any explanation for the worker target ai thing?
I fail to see any reason to set it like that...whyyyy
|
No nerf to marauder, terran should be fine. Less cheese is good. But I was really expecting more from the "mech buffs", they mostly nerfed bio. Well I hope to see more terran mech now anyways. (ie Thors!)
|
Hmmm I've always thought that SCVs had 60 hp because they were the only unit that could be harassed while building. D: it now takes 3 less hits to kill my scvs T_T
|
The DT nerf seems to be the only odd one and the only reason I can see it is maybe for lower level games where players may be getting attacked more aggressively with them. In higher level play they have not really been an issue.
|
On March 26 2010 12:32 RPGabe wrote:
I think the Jinro vs Lucifron game in the ZOTAC4 tournament was the end of the 60 HP SCV.
They played like a high-level 30 minute game that consisted of nothing but SCVs, Marines and Marauders against each other.
I had to call that style 'Soviet Terran' since it was all about sending the peasants off to the front line to die over and over again.
SCVs always became mostly expendable in TvT. SCV hp nerf to band-aid a little boo-boo in the best mirror at the moment? I have doubts. The SCV hp nerf was to the rine+SCV cheeses against protoss. But I think blizzard has misunderstood TvP cheese- SCVs taking one less hit from a Zealot isn't going to do much of anything. It was never how fast you could or couldn't kill the SCVs or the damage the SCVs did toe to toe with things like probes- it was that the SCV wall on marines make the marines virtually untouchable for P. T does a little bit more SCV dancing and the cheese is going to carry through with the swing.
|
Annoying repost: Could someone host the patch 6 file? I've ran every possible solution to fix the tracker download (stops at 50% then says tracker not responding), but to no avail.... nadda.
Thanks in advance for any headway on this.
|
Strange that they didn't change Terran mech like they alluded to in the dev chat.
|
On March 26 2010 12:47 Nightmarjoo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 12:44 j4vz wrote:
SCV -25% HP nerf... is this exagerate ?
so i guess hellions is now the official terran counter for DT ?
Hellion is the official counter to nothing, except maybe a counter to the terran-using-the-hellion's success.
since DT&HT are now considered as light unit, this is a kind of buff for hellion.
just do the math.
|
High templar getting ran over by Hellion's brings me much joy.
|
I'm going to jump on the band wagon and say that I really don't like the SCV nerf. I really loved the TvT action with marines and SCVs. Also makes dealing with harass much more difficult, especially for scrubs like me. Nothing that hasn't been posted in this thread 1000 times over though.
|
Q. Great job with Terran. Mech seems weaker and less reliable than a bio build at the moment. Any plans to buff mech?
A. We are looking at Terran mech build now. Actually right now. The balance guys are currently testing some fixes we tried this morning. We will get something to you guys as soon as we can.
o SCV
+ Life decreased from 60 to 45.
o Marine
+ Build time increased from 20 seconds to 25 seconds.
Good job Blizzard!
|
On March 26 2010 12:52 Mnijykmirl wrote:
SCVs always became mostly expendable in TvT. SCV hp nerf to band-aid a little boo-boo in the best mirror at the moment? I have doubts. The SCV hp nerf was to the rine+SCV cheeses against protoss. But I think blizzard has misunderstood TvP cheese- SCVs taking one less hit from a Zealot isn't going to do much of anything. It was never how fast you could or couldn't kill the SCVs or the damage the SCVs did toe to toe with things like probes- it was that the SCV wall on marines make the marines virtually untouchable for P. T does a little bit more SCV dancing and the cheese is going to carry through with the swing.
They were being used clearly when they weren't just 'extra' though, they were included on almost every attack. I think the basic idea is that they were just too influential in fights, any fight really, for their cost. The other races couldn't really leverage their workers for crazy slam dunks like that to match it.
I agree, this was clearly to address the TvP cheese, though.
|
|
|
Post above me made me lol
Edit: Now it's 2 posts above me... I prolly shoulda just quoted it.
|
On March 26 2010 12:52 omgCRAZY wrote:
The DT nerf seems to be the only odd one and the only reason I can see it is maybe for lower level games where players may be getting attacked more aggressively with them. In higher level play they have not really been an issue.
I think it's about mixing DTs to your main army which kinda catches players with no detection offguard and they just can't understand how 2 zealots and 3 stalkers can deal whopping damage.
|
On March 26 2010 11:48 xnub wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 11:45 Blacklizard wrote:On March 26 2010 09:34 Ideas wrote:On March 26 2010 09:33 anotherone wrote:
How does SCV looks compared to Drone and Probe now? Both has regen when SCV only 5 more HP, its too easy to kill now and it will lose 1v1 with drone or probe. I know SCV/rine allin was hard but men... SCVs can be repaired AND healed by medivacs And marines are really good at killing worker scouts early on. Zealots... not so much. And in general ranged units are much better at killing workers in oh crap base scenarios when workers have to fight at home. Early on, that meant Terran had an advantage. I still don't like zerglings chasing away early scouts so quick though... reduce their starting speed? most people get probes / drones into terran base long before the raz is up / rine and most times they will try and kill the SCV on the Rax or supply depo
Right, but to scout tech you need to stay longer. Can't dance around when marines are there.
SCVs aren't that vulnerable when building a barracks b/c they swap sides and are "inside" it much more than a small building. So basically Terran will need to defend against worker harass for their 2nd depot if they build it at the ramp. Not a huge deal. They can also:
-build 1 depot and 1 rax at bottom of ramp to wall off earlier and probably not have to deal with worker harass at all
-build close to the CC, so their other SCVs will be nearby to rescue any harassed builder or tag team off conveniently. Maybe build a bunker if you do this and salvage it later.
|
Five placement matches huh?
|
creep looks like crap. completly grey. looks like sandstone or something
yea zerg units are very easily seen on it but god it looks awful
|
Stat and character reset ^_^
|
On March 26 2010 12:47 Nightmarjoo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 12:44 j4vz wrote:
SCV -25% HP nerf... is this exagerate ?
so i guess hellions is now the official terran counter for DT ?
Hellion is the official counter to nothing, except maybe a counter to the terran-using-the-hellion's success.
what? hellions toast zealots worse than vultures did in broodwar... those things definitely have a use.
|
EU server just went down.
|
Could they possibly make HT and DT even HARDER to get? So sick of complaining about Toss being so SLOW at this game. I just want to see one patch where they dont touch Toss and keep decreasing the other races. Then it will be more even IMO.
|
Could they possibly make HT and DT even HARDER to get? So sick of complaining about Toss being so SLOW at this game. I just want to see one patch where they dont touch Toss and keep decreasing the other races. Then it will be more even IMO.
high templar arent nerfed, they are actually buffed indirectly, because the tech time and cost is the same but emp radius is nerfed....
|
I think the people complaining about the obs, fact, scv changes just because they aren't like Starcraft anymore is a bit ridiculous. This is a different game . . . There are new units built from the fact, the combat AI with workers is different and I guess the obs was changed to make it cost similar to overseer.
|
Annoying repost: Could someone host the patch 6 file? I've ran every possible solution to fix the tracker download (stops at 50% then says tracker not responding), but to no avail.... nadda.
Thanks in advance for any headway on this.
|
On March 26 2010 13:01 MavercK wrote:
creep looks like crap. completly grey. looks like sandstone or something
yea zerg units are very easily seen on it but god it looks awful
The problem isn't the units on creep. It's the zerg units themselves. They are too dark. They need to be lightened up, with contrast on the unit textures beefed up a little.
Also, gray? That's not organic at all. Give it some kind of tint at least.
|
Viking: Mech builds are very gas heavy, and by lowering the Vikings gas requirement you allow them to be used as a bit more of a filler, instead of feeling forced into including extra bio (rines) or hellions (which are too niche for my liking as a filler unit, i prefer to use them for harass and scouting etc).
This may also allow us to get a few extra Vikings out to help deter mutas (even if they are not the most cost effective counter). Viking harass in TvT is also slightly more scary now as your first 2 vikings can 1 shot SCVs when focus firing together.
Ghost; It was only taking me 2 EMPs to hit the whole P army and very little planning on where to land the emp. Increased decision making is always a plus. To use EMP on an enemy of the same size you will need more Ghosts now. By adopting a higher ghost mix into the bio builds they are making the Ghost vs HT caster battle a lot more interesting IMO.
Marine/Colossus: I like the new upgrade relationship between Marines and colossus. With no upgrades it now takes 2 hits to kill a full HP marine, or 1 if they stim. Combat shield does not allow them to take an extra hit from full health, but does allow them to use 1 stim and still take 2 hits. I like it.
Reactor: Removing early rine rushes does not bother me too much. Early hellion harass will also be slower. None of that strikes me as a too bad thing. We will probably see a shift towards additional barracks being used over reactor for increased marine production in early game (which I like). The biggest reactor change for me is to do with air. (Forgetting lift off for a moment)... Previously if you would get your first 2 vikings or medivacs out faster if you use the reactor at the expense of the additional gas investment. Now you get your first 2 out faster if you don't build a reactor, but get your first 3/4 out faster if you did get reactor first. This will make build and timing choices more interesting, as the advantage of the reactor is still evident but more situational. This applies to all reactorable units, but air is where the decision making will more effect me. I also want to note that I feel that now you always have to decide if you can afford to drop a reactor at all stages in the game. Previously in mid-late game if you didn't need a Tech-Lab on it then you always wanted a reactor. Now you have to ask yourself if you can survive without the production while it builds. If you just build 4 rax you may want to build the reactors 1 or 2 at a time now instead of clunking them all down at once.
SCV: First off I would like to say that I like the threat level system in SC2. Workers>Military>Buildings. This creates an interesting decision. By pulling workers you are decreasing your economy. But by including workers in your unit-mix you are able to use their HP as a 'shield' for your army and gain a military advantage. By lowering the HP of the mule to be more on par with that of the other races workers you now allow each race to make this economy/army decision making on more even terms. This 'meta mechanic' allows you to effectively sacrifice future income for current advantage. It is a choice which I am glad has been introduced in SC2 and feel that now homogeneous worker HP will make this an important part of the economic decision making process instead of as a cheese strat.+ Show Spoiler +A bit more Off topic:
Each race will be able to use the worker inclusion in different ways. Protoss can run them in front of their army and pull them back as they take hits (trying not to go too far below shields). They can reuse these probes when their shields return, keeping them in the back in the mean time. It also forces the enemy to micro more because sending 1 probe ahead (and a little to the side) of his army will force tanks/colossus etc to fire at the incorrect target and have 1-2 shots perform no splash to the mass of your army).
Terran has a decision to make regarding the use of their SCV's in combat now. Do you attack-move them in, taking hits for your army and add slightly to the dps if you make it to them? or Do you set 9 SCV to auto-repair and keep them in a small cluster between your force and theirs to take more hits for your army but add less to the dps?
Zerg regen slow so I expect them to be used primarily in an attack-move fashion than either of the other ways.
We don't see players really using workers in this was atm (except the pre nurfed SCVs) but I think that as long as you weigh up the current gain to future economic loss it may become useful for all races.
Observers: Don't like it? Deal with it. Detection is meant to have a higher value in SC2. I know you may be use to being able to get as many observers as you want, but now you have to take ecconomy into consideration a little more. Poor you. (Seriously tho, it may hurt you a little early on, and it will make observer sniping a bit more OH SHIT!, but I don't see that as too bad a change).
Stalker: Nice buff early game. They will be able to better hold off muta, and other early attack until you get a wider choice of units to use against other threats (no +heavy with upgrades means that they still don't want them being massed against everything in later game, but they will hold off early air agression). Can't complain. Oh... and for all those of you who are... + Show Spoiler +All these people winging that Stalkers are still weak against Marauders, Roaches and Hydras... You are SUPPOSE to be bad against marauders and roaches, thats the point... It's not an all-in one killing machine. Just because you have bonus to heavy does not mean you should counter all heavy units in the game. And why does everyone lump hydra in with that comment? They are not heavy, and you just got a damage buff against them. We should all know by now that maths theory =/= game play. Test out the patch and see how they fair against Hydra now before complaining about them pls.
DT: I don't see this as much of a nurf. More like reinforcing the role Blizzard has for them. They are less encouraged for cheese now. You can still add 1-2 in with your unit mix to force detection or waste enemy scans. And now they can one shot SCVs. Late game expansions will have to be more wary till they are properly defended, warp-prism DT warp-ins in mineral lines will be more scary etc.
DT/HT: I feel it was a mistake that these units did not have a armor type. Pretty much everything else does, and clearly they are not heavy anyway Hellions may find a way into more T unit-mixes, and the micro between T trying to hellion HTs and Protoss trying to surround or deter the hellions will be an entertaining addition to the game.
Baneling: I find this unexpected. I still don't fell they will be economically viable against heavy units, but the economic loss will not feel quite as sever when they hit the wrong targets.
Roach: Needed change
Edit: Improved replay map downloading: Yay! I can stop breaking the terms of use by adding maps to cache manually -.-"
|
|
|
On March 26 2010 13:04 Newguy wrote:Show nested quote +Could they possibly make HT and DT even HARDER to get? So sick of complaining about Toss being so SLOW at this game. I just want to see one patch where they dont touch Toss and keep decreasing the other races. Then it will be more even IMO. high templar arent nerfed, they are actually buffed indirectly, because the tech time and cost is the same but emp radius is nerfed....
since they are considered light unit now, they are weaker against unit like hellion/reaper/ghost
|
Looks like good changes, the SCV nerf is lame, but was definitely needed to stop the SCV pressure. So powerful using SCVs in a fight when mules can still provide so many minerals.
|
On March 26 2010 12:36 Spinel720 wrote:
I still don't know how to deal with CharlieMurphy's "Mustaches" brood lords still gonna be able to kill me :/
gotta get carriers and mofo ship imo, I think a few archons might actually help to defend the stalkers from broodlings too.
|
On March 26 2010 13:02 Ftrunkz wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 12:47 Nightmarjoo wrote:On March 26 2010 12:44 j4vz wrote:
SCV -25% HP nerf... is this exagerate ?
so i guess hellions is now the official terran counter for DT ?
Hellion is the official counter to nothing, except maybe a counter to the terran-using-the-hellion's success. what? hellions toast zealots worse than vultures did in broodwar... those things definitely have a use.
They're not even very good against slowlots, let alone chargelots lol.
I guess if you don't mind wasting the money on making and upgrading them, having a few to do a suicide ht snipe like you use vults for in bw could work, the difference being that you're always making vults in bw tvp since they're always useful, unlike hellions, which are rarely useful.
|
On March 26 2010 13:12 CharlieMurphy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 12:36 Spinel720 wrote:
I still don't know how to deal with CharlieMurphy's "Mustaches" brood lords still gonna be able to kill me :/ gotta get carriers and mofo ship imo, I think a few archons might actually help to defend the stalkers from broodlings too.
Are carriers really viable considering the huge damage bonus Corruptors get against them?
|
sorry if this has been conversed in this part, but has anyone else's patch update stopped at 75% and the tracker fails each and every time at 75%?
|
maybe the baneling change is to address PvZ issues? Keep in mind we have no idea about the metagame evolution on asian servers, they might be far ahead in PvZ, considering how the matchup is pretty much still evolving heavily on the EU server (see naz rolling through every Z he faced in ESL when everybody and their mother was crying about Z>P imba).
|
20 bucks they are going to buff scvs for the next patch
|
SCV and Marine rush will be easier to defense now, uh ^^
Edit: Server is still down in Europe server? :p coz i can't login.
|
I heard from someone that it was announced that in the actual game release, you wont get promoted between leagues, as in the league you get placed in is the one you'll stay in?
If this is true, does it also apply to this portion of beta, since they're trying to simulate launch?
Fucking got 3 PvZ and lolmutas, so was put in silver. would be frustrating as hell if I was stuck there
|
Yeah, and we thought a 20/20 probe was impossible to fend off with 60hp SCVs in BW. This is just nuts, especially considering SCVs in SC2 are less plentiful than the other races' workers (thus further justifying their hp total, or so I thought). There had to have been a better way to stop SCV/marine rushes from being so strong. You know, like nerfing marine build time by 25% or something crazy like that!
And like everyone else has said, the baneling and DT changes just make you boggle.
|
Russian Federation1612 Posts
|
As a terran that likes to 12/13 rax, I have to say that banelings are instant win units for zerg. It's horrible how overpowered they are against any sort of marine or barracks play in general, ESPECIALLY with speed. The only counter I can think of is to fast 2 fact into upgraded hellions, but then the muta switch is too powerful. I'm pissed off about it, especially because of the nerf to marine production. Time to adopt a whole different playstyle vs zerg, thanks for drastically changing an entire matchup blizzard
Also, if you're a zerg and you're not going banelings before lair vs T, you're doing it wrong. They allow you to fast expand 100% safely, and at the same time delay an expansion for the terran.
|
On March 26 2010 14:43 TheAntZ wrote:
I heard from someone that it was announced that in the actual game release, you wont get promoted between leagues, as in the league you get placed in is the one you'll stay in?
If this is true, does it also apply to this portion of beta, since they're trying to simulate launch?
Fucking got 3 PvZ and lolmutas, so was put in silver. would be frustrating as hell if I was stuck there
Hard to say since the promotion system was so spotty before the patch anyway.
|
On March 26 2010 09:04 Mastermind wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 08:58 sith wrote:
Nerf's across the board.
...Nice stalker buff though. It's really not much of a buff. Stalkers will be better at stopping mutas and in the early game in general, but in the late game they will be weaker against armored units due to being less effected by upgrades.
The fact you can go stalkers in the first place would be a buff.
Slower marine production, too. I'm guessing we'll see stalkers in PvT
|
On March 26 2010 13:36 diehilde wrote:
maybe the baneling change is to address PvZ issues? Keep in mind we have no idea about the metagame evolution on asian servers, they might be far ahead in PvZ, considering how the matchup is pretty much still evolving heavily on the EU server (see naz rolling through every Z he faced in ESL when everybody and their mother was crying about Z>P imba).
the matchup is still z>p, only way people can win is with zeal/sentry/stalker/immortal allins, though those are very powerful. banelings werent the best way to defend that, now they might be. but if z survives the early game p is absolutely boned and i dont think the stalker buff is gonna help that much.
|
On March 26 2010 14:51 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 13:36 diehilde wrote:
maybe the baneling change is to address PvZ issues? Keep in mind we have no idea about the metagame evolution on asian servers, they might be far ahead in PvZ, considering how the matchup is pretty much still evolving heavily on the EU server (see naz rolling through every Z he faced in ESL when everybody and their mother was crying about Z>P imba). the matchup is still z>p, only way people can win is with zeal/sentry/stalker/immortal allins, though those are very powerful. banelings werent the best way to defend that, now they might be. but if z survives the early game p is absolutely boned and i dont think the stalker buff is gonna help that much.
Agreed :/
Though i am very interested in seeing how the stalker buff does anything about mutas or if its the same sad story :/
|
On March 26 2010 14:43 TheAntZ wrote:
I heard from someone that it was announced that in the actual game release, you wont get promoted between leagues, as in the league you get placed in is the one you'll stay in?
If this is true, does it also apply to this portion of beta, since they're trying to simulate launch?
Fucking got 3 PvZ and lolmutas, so was put in silver. would be frustrating as hell if I was stuck there
A friend of mine (who's name I don't know how because of the reset >_< but it was Flameberg) went from Copper league to Gold league. He said that everyone in his divisions join date was the same as his. He speculated that whenever there are enough players in one division good enough to go into another, a new division is created and all those players create it. He also speculated that this would slowly lower the size of divisions and that occastionally (altho he has not actually seen this) a divsion may be broken up if it gets too small and that the players would be assigned to other divisions in the same league.
|
I believe Ht armor gone to light makes microed banelings a good counter to them as zerg had no counter to them.
EDIT: by counter I mean snipers
|
Why do HT and DT have to be Psionic AND Light? Does it have any difference to just Light?
|
Because they are psionic and light units mebbe?
|
On March 26 2010 15:06 lolaloc wrote:
Why do HT and DT have to be Psionic AND Light? Does it have any difference to just Light?
Does the Psionic stat actually effect the game in any way? Theres no +damage modifier for Psionic or abilities which effect units with the Psionic stat that I can find.
|
Nope, my guess is that it has something to do with the campaign.
|
On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o SCV
+ Life decreased from 60 to 45.
Justice
|
On March 26 2010 09:01 InterWill wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o Pathing has been improved so units can now properly block ramps and choke points.
WIN :D
Oh god yes!
I also love the change to SCV hp, it's exactly what I've been hoping for!
As a Protoss player I also like the Robotics Bay nerf. It was kind of boring that it was so much superior to any other build (at least as a safe standard opening).
Could've used a bigger buff for stalkers. And the nerf to DTs was just weird.
Oh, and nerf marauders.
|
On March 26 2010 15:06 lolaloc wrote:
Why do HT and DT have to be Psionic AND Light? Does it have any difference to just Light?
its a nerf
|
The baneling buff makes them better against buildings, right? Does that make Dimaga's ling/bling rush even deadlier?
|
can someone take a screenshot of the new zerg appearance on creep, and the new protoss distinguishing look?
|
On March 26 2010 15:15 Machine[USA] wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o SCV
+ Life decreased from 60 to 45.
Justice
Ya get just +5 hit points for the only worker that is expose while building and that can't regenerate at all on his own... Pretty damn good...
|
Can anyone tell a visual difference with zerg on creep? I can't for the life of me.
|
Decreasing factory cost just made Banshee rushes that much stronger, my friend who was a 50th ranked Silver player went 5-0 doing a Banshee harass rush every game and is now Platinum.
|
On March 26 2010 15:47 Two_DoWn wrote:
Can anyone tell a visual difference with zerg on creep? I can't for the life of me.
its a lot lighter then compared to the older darker version
|
On March 26 2010 15:47 Two_DoWn wrote:
Can anyone tell a visual difference with zerg on creep? I can't for the life of me.
I don't have a screenshot, but I was able to notice a difference. The creep is a much lighter color than it was previously. The colors of the zerg buildings haven't changed, and the creep used to look almost exactly like the building color before the patch. Now the creep is a lighter, grayish purple.
|
I think its brilliant for SCVs HP to be nerfed, they can repair each other and be healed my medivacs. There is no reason why a DT should be able to one shot drones and probes but not SCVs, but now they can.
|
SVC hp was enought for avoiding the rush vs P now increased marine time... that just suck
|
On March 26 2010 15:54 Limenade wrote:
I think its brilliant for SCVs HP to be nerfed, they can repair each other and be healed my medivacs. There is no reason why a DT should be able to one shot drones and probes but not SCVs, but now they can.
Repair costs money/time/micro
Medivacs is mid-tech and cost mana
They also remain vulnerable while building
Is that enough reasons for why they should have more hp?
|
how are we supposed to scout zerg early game now
poor scvs
|
On March 26 2010 15:12 DeCoup wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 15:06 lolaloc wrote:
Why do HT and DT have to be Psionic AND Light? Does it have any difference to just Light? Does the Psionic stat actually effect the game in any way? Theres no +damage modifier for Psionic or abilities which effect units with the Psionic stat that I can find.
Some units used to have + to psionic way back when and stuff like infestors can't MC psionic units, dunno about now
|
On March 26 2010 15:21 Assault_1 wrote:
can someone take a screenshot of the new zerg appearance on creep, and the new protoss distinguishing look?
Heres the Zerg one, haven't noticed what is so different about the protoss yet... But I can easily see those zerg units, they did a good job imo
^ might wanna click to make the pic actual size
|
Stalker buff does masses for the toss in ZvP, they roll zerglings now if they have any kind of zealot protection or critical mass
|
On March 26 2010 09:11 HazMat wrote:
Obs cost even more gas T_T
Zerg barely got nurfed, this is bs.
Oh no my nearly free obs that most players wont bother getting rid of cost more!
Zerg got a large nerf to roach along with able to block ramps = a zerg nerf as zerg main unit is melee and isn't that strong, the zergling.
Basically made the ling a worthless early game unit. ramp busting is the only reason i massed lings early on i guess they want me to use banelings.
|
On March 26 2010 16:09 Raydog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 15:21 Assault_1 wrote:
can someone take a screenshot of the new zerg appearance on creep, and the new protoss distinguishing look? Heres the Zerg one, haven't noticed what is so different about the protoss yet... But I can easily see those zerg units, they did a good job imo ^ might wanna click to make the pic actual size
nice screenshot, looks like they just turned up creep's gamma
|
wait... they buffed banelings? :I like they werent imba enough!
|
|
|
^
Which could both have been fixed by editing the AI; a much more sensible change imo.
|
I think the point of making obs more expensive was to match the cost of the Overseer, which kind of makes sense.
SCV health nerf is good. I do like that now a drone vs scv fight is dictated by whoever hits first, as opposed to the scv always winning.
The stalker buff was long time needed. The colossus nerf makes them pretty venerable now, but they can 1 shot unupgraded marines with a +1 ground attack.
|
|
|
On March 26 2010 16:29 dronebabo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 16:17 Vexki wrote:On March 26 2010 15:32 checo wrote:On March 26 2010 15:15 Machine[USA] wrote:On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o SCV
+ Life decreased from 60 to 45.
Justice Ya get just +5 hit points for the only worker that is expose while building and that can't regenerate at all on his own... Pretty damn good... How have some people not realised yet that drones in SC2 have 50 health, not 40. They have had this much since the blizzcon build of SC2. Why are 90% of people convinced that this is not the case? Regardless, SCVs were ruining diversity of builds in TvT and TvP. lol drones have 40 hp
lol i was about to say :|
|
So I played a couple of games, I'm missing that 15 hp when my scvs are getting harassed D:
|
Blizzard... not smooth. SCV nerf imo goes too far, too many ripples. All they really needed to do was fix combat AI so that workers are only prioritized when near a "friendly mineral patch/geyser" (IE, one with a friendly Command Center close to it).
Problem now is, besides Probe/Drone harass while SCVs build structures (yes, easy to deal with, although less so now) which is the most obvious consequence, this really hurts SCV repair of Turrets v Mutas, makes Muta harass WAY more effective overall, leaves Terran a lot more vulnerable to very early 'ling rushes (and even Zealot rushes as well), and Scout SCVs die much faster to Queens now (which doesn't sound like much but it can be the difference between scouting the Roach Warren or shift to Lair tech versus not).
Don't really feel the Baneling buff was necessary unless Blizzard is just really intent on diversifying Zerg Hatchery tech more for all situations...
Do like the Bunker build time buff but the nerf to ALL Reactor build times (not just 'rax Reactors, but Starport and Factory Reactors as well...) I'm not a fan of and I really question if the Reactor time nerf AND SCV build time nerf together were both really necessary... Seems like overkill to me.
The rest is fine I think (as T I'm not going to complain about DT nerfs xD and yay that Hellions are way more effective against them now; although from a spectator standpoint I like the Stalker buff and T got a similar buff to Vikings which I really liked so I'm sympathetic) and I'll have to try out the new Ghost EMP although reducing their gas cost by 50 I think should be a fine trade-off for reducing the radius of EMP.
|
Finally they fixed the 6 marine+ scv all in rush vs protoss.Now we can tech properly. I think though that SCVs need to have 50 hp instead of 45.Now they die with 3 hits(6) from zealots.It seems to me that the reactor and marine nerf was enough to slow down the nurf but time will tell.
I want to see also the implications of pathing in combat also not only in choke points.I suppose they fixed this by making the hitboxed a bit larger?
|
lol @ the people who were crying yesterday that it took too long to get to DTs ahahahahaha.
|
Specially on Blistering Sands and Desert Oasis, creep color looks much lighter, which is good on the eyes IMO.
|
nooooo the terran nerfss T___T
|
YEEEERRRRRSSSS! SCVS are wayyyy less imba now, ha ha. You've deserved this for over a decade terran!
|
Roaches are now black??? I notice in that screenshot with Zerg Creep, Roaches are now noticeably darker. Are roaches now Black and Team Colored rather than brown and team colored now? If so, liking this change because Roaches are now much easier to distinguish between other Zerg Units.
|
I don''t understand de DT nerf.
I fully understand the Baneling buff... They were kinda a pure hard counter unit and that just sucks for a unit that is dead after one use.
|
Kinda interesting patch tbh alot of cool tweaks. Looking forward to see how this actually plays out after a few days
I think the observer nerf was really needed - Toss scouting was extremly powerful, and increasing the buildtime alone was really needed imho.
Too much screaming here though, just play it and see how it works..
|
lol what terran has a balanced worker unit now?
|
I kinda like the SCV-nerf, but I don't understand DT-nerf and Baneling-buff at all...
|
I miss a Reaper buff. Well, tech lab is a little cheaper and bunker set up faster but that's not too much. I still won't use Reapers at all. They are just too much of a commitment early on in the game.
Ghost EMP was OP I used them all the time in TvP (I'm a T only player). Guess the nerf is justified.
|
I love that they are tuning hard counters a bit!
Patch generally looks great, everything made sense to me except the DT nerf. I do think terran will have to use 2 scvs to build the first barracks now, but I'll have to test tonight.
I'm dissapointed in top players (and posters) whining in this thread without mentioning the buffs they get. This to me shows that sometimes people are better posters/balancers when they play less, otherwise they get to attached to their own results/builds. And no, that does not mean that posting without even playing the beta is a good idea :p
|
I really don't get that DT nerf, what the heck was wrong with them? I mean, they've already been rarely used. Personally I liked do tune in some DT vs Zerg as a little advantage if Zerg forgets his Detector, however, with a absolutely useless building that costs more than the templar archive... I dont know.
Also, what is that baneling buff about? I strongly disagree that zergs needed another rush n bust opportunity than auto-surrounding speedlings. I still cant believe how fast they are anyway, so OUTSIDE they are hardly to avoid. But hey, let's see how it develops
I like the TvP changes as far as it appears on the paper, definately gonna change the gameflow.
|
On March 26 2010 17:29 Foreplay wrote:
lol what terran has a balanced worker unit now?
Oh i didn't notice that they gave SCVs regen O.o
|
On March 26 2010 11:20 DeMusliM wrote:
i'm pretty annoyed by baneling buff actually, the more i think about it - the less it makes sense, unless they want to appeal to the casual zerg players once more.
ZvT largely consisted of MMM + ravens/tanks vs ling/baneling/hydra/infestors
The fights consisted of marines getting fungal growthed, and being blown up (banelings running around the marauders, then clicking a+move onto the marines) - i automatically assumed that blizz recognised that the matchup was pretty tough for terran to handle.
Even without infestors, the zerg could attack+move the terran army, except the banelings and just hunt down the marines (if the marines pulled back, it would leave the marauders to fight the hydras, which would probaly leave the terran in a vulnerable state anyway).
Now, the way i see this nerf is - it means that banelings rather than having to avoid the marauder wall (it was the best way of beating zergs who a+moved - running the marines back and letting him blow up the marauders to prevent major losses, and only minor) it means that a+moving everything, including the banelings isn't half as ineffective. Personally i really dislike this change - it gives zerg less reason to micro in fights, but purely concentrate on where to fungal growth. The fact fights are becoming less micro orientated (yes, the baneling buff does decrease the need for micro) i am gradually becoming more skeptical of Blizzard's future plans with this game.
I don't believe the patch has looked at the right things - while yes the marine/scv rush was nerfed vs protoss, sure - i don't believe it's helped protoss at all. The more reliable Marauder expo strategy was buffed (less gas cost, faster starports) and stalker buffing won't make a difference vs marauder but will probaly be less effective (same damage vs armoured, 8+6 10+4, but less with upgrades) slower immortal, and more cost on observers. I can only see this further swaying the matchups in favour, of what they were already in favour of.
Protoss will lose to Terrans more frequently, and Terrans will further struggle vs Zergs.
Obviously my main gripe is with the Baneling buff, but also the reactor nerf (this wasn't even part of any of the "scv/rine rush"), personally it just feels as if blizz really want to remove all micro factors in this game, and just turn it into a a+move slugfest. Not impressed at all...
I don't understand why you don't like this patch.
It's not guaranteed that Protoss still will lose Terrans until people won't try it out.
As for the Zerg buffs, haven't you won last zotac beating 3-1 one of the best zergs?
I believe you have more rooms in TvZ now. Cheaper and faster factories = fast vikings/banshees. I remember you were trying Air against zerg and now it becomes more reasonable.
|
On March 26 2010 18:33 Kaniol wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 17:29 Foreplay wrote:
lol what terran has a balanced worker unit now? Oh i didn't notice that they gave SCVs regen O.o
They can be healed. They can be repaired. They can't tank. Me likey.
|
DT nerf was propably done because they were harrassing T a lot making them "waste" the energy for scan instead of Mule.I guess this change is to give them time to get Ravens out.
|
Most changes are awesome good imo. Specially the stalker buff that everyone was suggesting, too bad they didnt move the blink ability to Core of made it cheaper, because i would love to see it sometime in the streams...
Obs price is kinda sad tho, considering you need one to see high ground all around the map and to blink.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
Demuslim pretty much hit the nail on the head. Furthermore, the nerfed DTs truly make any DT based strategy vs zerg completely not viable - and it was only marginal before anyway. Guess they really want protoss to use robo vs zerg.
|
So they didnt fix the speedlings running through blocked ramps bug ???
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On March 26 2010 15:32 checo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 15:15 Machine[USA] wrote:On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote:
o SCV
+ Life decreased from 60 to 45.
Justice Ya get just +5 hit points for the only worker that is expose while building and that can't regenerate at all on his own... Pretty damn good...
I think this is the main fault with SCV life being removed. We can get attacked mostly all the time while building which leaves us very vunerable to just getting killed straight off by whatever scout. No other race has ever needed to pull another worker off to save the unit building their building :S
|
And no other race pulled it's worker on the front line if attacking because they tank more than some of your combat units.
|
Haha! I like how everyone complained about banelings, and blizzard increased their damage ;D.
Also, Roach regen rate decreased significantly =(.
|
sigh most of the zerg imba is still untouched, really a pretty bad patch
|
ARE THEY CRAZEH??? whatisthisidonteven...
How can you miss the overall picture? Terran was buffed hardcore, assuming you don't just build marines only and win everyone with that.
Protoss was nerfed big AGAIN.
I'm so glad I'm Zerg, the changes in the last patch are not noticeable. I'll just have to use some stupid all-in strat vs Terran to have any chance to win, and get free wins vs Protoss.
|
Man what a bad patch, the game is still imbalanced. They didn't fix the entire game. What are they thinking?
/irony
|
Quite a few gas buffs for terran but reduce SCV HP by 15.
What is this bullshit?
Give me back the 200/100 factory and 50/50 tech lab if it means my SCVs won't get killed by their scouting probe when building. Hell, they already get killed half the time if I don't pull another worker off to harass them.
|
k well i cant beat zerg players atm with terran, mutas are raping me, even non muta builds are. I know I havent played enough but a decent zerg is trashing me
|
My sc2 beta identifier was .scv . What will I do now blizzard ?
|
The whole patch was in the wrong direction:
- Everything leads to more massing of units...
As T, you don't use SCV's that creative anymore, or with much less impact, rines are worse, so you just spam Marauders etc. Maybe more Mech, which is kinda nice, but I think we'll see lots of Marauder-pushes.
As P, you can't go DT's anymore, so you just spam mass-gates Stalkers/Zealots and Immos... with that, also Archons, which needed a buff, got worse, because DT's could morph into Archons. Observers were nerved, so you don't even go for them anymore, just pure stupid lowtier attackunit-masses.
As Z, well, Z is strongest race by far still...
Important fixes like Highground-advantage, much better static defense etc. haven't been addressed at all. First patch that is really disappointing to me, not because blizzard didn't magically balance the game, but because some "fixes" are just so bad an very important stuff hasn't been changed:
- FE-Zerg can still Zergling-rush a 2-gateing Protoss: Protoss cannot be aggressive early on in the game and they can't defend well either because cannons and zealots suck against speedlings/banelings/roaches/marauders...
- Banelings got even better? They need a nerf, not a buff - c'mon!
- Archons needed a buff.
- Tanks needed a buff specific to Tanks, not just mech overall, now we'll just see more Hellion-rushes...
- Queen needed a huge nerf.
- Marauders needed a nerf.
- Roaches needed nerf.
- Highground-advantage needs to be implemented.
- Bonus DMG against certain armor-types needs to be toned down quite a bit, maybe base-dmg higher or sth.
- Phoenix needed buff.
|
isnt nerfing P/T = buffing Z ?
imo stupid patch, P are doing worse and worse every patch and finally they got nerfed again (like every patch?).
@ people saying stalker got buffed: this is a joke! they just switched 2 attack points and removed +1 from upgrades = nerf! they are maybe better against less hp units (linge/marine) but still suck against every thing elae + at the moment u get +1 attack they are worse against armored units than they used to be before.
T got some hard nerfs but the EMP nerf isnt really that huge. now u can get some extra ghosts since its only 150 Gas.
Im still missing a strong GtA unit for P (an no stalker got nerfed for this case, its only better against mutas + viking but suck even more against everythin with armor)!
|
United States47024 Posts
On March 26 2010 19:41 MeProU_Kor wrote:
@ people saying stalker got buffed: this is a joke! they just switched 2 attack points and removed +1 from upgrades = nerf! they are maybe better against less hp units (linge/marine) but still suck against every thing elae + at the moment u get +1 attack they are worse against armored units than they used to be before.
Because clearly after patch 1, people never used Vikings again, amirite?
Switching damage type to normal is a moderate buff. The Viking showed this in patch 1, where virtually the exact same damage change was made, but instead of change in upgrades, it was given an armor reduction. Subsequently it went from being almost never used to being seen commonly in 2 of the 3 matchups, and as a viable option in the 3rd.
On March 26 2010 19:41 MeProU_Kor wrote:
Im still missing a strong GtA unit for P (an no stalker got nerfed for this case, its only better against mutas + viking but suck even more against everythin with armor)!
Aren't those the only two air units the Stalker has to fight most of the time in PvT and PvZ anyway?
|
I like the factory and banneling buff. Maybe even the colossus nerf. I'm not so sure about the rest. Maybe the scv shouldn't have beed nerfed so much.
Oh, and I kinda agree with the roach regen nerf. Just a bit.
|
Nerfing the SCV , the marine ,the reactor and the DT is fucking ridiculous . WHAT WERE THEY THINKING
Still no bugfix on the right click = attack move sometimes :/
|
On March 26 2010 19:38 kickinhead wrote:
The whole patch was in the wrong direction:
- Everything leads to more massing of units...
As T, you don't use SCV's that creative anymore, or with much less impact, rines are worse, so you just spam Marauders etc. Maybe more Mech, which is kinda nice, but I think we'll see lots of Marauder-pushes.
As P, you can't go DT's anymore, so you just spam mass-gates Stalkers/Zealots and Immos... with that, also Archons, which needed a buff, got worse, because DT's could morph into Archons. Observers were nerved, so you don't even go for them anymore, just pure stupid lowtier attackunit-masses.
As Z, well, Z is strongest race by far still...
Important fixes like Highground-advantage, much better static defense etc. haven't been addressed at all. First patch that is really disappointing to me, not because blizzard didn't magically balance the game, but because some "fixes" are just so bad an very important stuff hasn't been changed:
- FE-Zerg can still Zergling-rush a 2-gateing Protoss: Protoss cannot be aggressive early on in the game and they can't defend well either because cannons and zealots suck against speedlings/banelings/roaches/marauders...
- Banelings got even better? They need a nerf, not a buff - c'mon!
- Archons needed a buff.
- Tanks needed a buff specific to Tanks, not just mech overall, now we'll just see more Hellion-rushes...
- Queen needed a huge nerf.
- Marauders needed a nerf.
- Roaches needed nerf.
- Highground-advantage needs to be implemented.
- Bonus DMG against certain armor-types needs to be toned down quite a bit, maybe base-dmg higher or sth.
- Phoenix needed buff.
What do you mean by 'use SCV creatively'? If you mean early push, that doesn't make any sense. They are not supposed to fight/attack/tank enemies. The dumbest thing I've ever heard. spam maradeurs? Doesn't terran have other units? Vikings/banshees, tanks, helions are very good units. I was seeing MMM strategy in every damn game,
|
The amount complaints in this thread makes me wanna wish that there should be a Blizzard representative posting in TL.net
|
Hmm when blizzard said terran was down in all mu's due to balancing I didnt think they would just try to change how they play from bio to more mech...
Nerfed tier 1 (scv/marine/reactor) - As Nazgul said terran will still be able to make marauders and bunkers early game --> strong
Buffed tier 2 slightly (cheaper fact, tech lab, viking)
Baneling buff and DT nerf? funny;;
|
Vikings were already the best air to air unit and now they make them less gas intensive? Terran is going to dominate the skies, while the reactor change doesn't really affect the startport units since you have plenty of time to prebuild it with a rax or fact.
I always thought factories were too expensive(even in BW, since toss has a slight advantage over terran), now building tanks costs you 200/125, instead of 250/150, which is nice.
Reactors are now not going to be used on barracks at all, you're losing 2 marines in build time and it costs gas, while barracks are minerals only. Most likely people will only prebuild them on barracks for factories and starports.
SCV life nerf a bit too harsh, now they are equal to drones in combat, while both zerglings and zealots roll marines early. 50 HP would've been enough of a nerf.
Bunkers already build faster than cannons and crawlers, so now terrans can now react to emergency situations much faster than the other races by building a bunker next to their CC, and bunker rushing will be easier.
Thermal lance not 1 hit killing marines by itself was needed. They simply rolled over terran armies(and zerg ones when massed) and the very powerful EMP was needed to counter that effect.
Obs nerf needed, they were the best detector being cloacked themselves and the cheapest at the same time, while ravens are 100/200 and overseers 150/100(if it doesn't get killed it costs you effectively 50/100, since you already have overlords)
Would've prefered if stalkers got a buff against armored and sentries got a bonus vs light, so they would counter different things, while now they are even more similar to each other.
Putting light or armored on every unit would've been nice(maybe except archons since they are all shields and are pretty weak already).
No idea why the nerfed the dark shrine, DTs already cost more gas and require their own building.
Banelings are already very good, I dunno why they got a buff against the units that are used to counter them by tanking their damage.
|
THey can make tanks useless, they can force marines to fight with with bows and axes but HOW THEY DARE TO DO THIS TO SCV? (.
|
i bet thhey nerfed the DTs because the SCVs now are easy kill. could be a possible reason
|
On March 26 2010 20:12 anotherone wrote:THey can make tanks useless, they can force marines to fight with with bows and axes but HOW THEY DARE TO DO THIS TO SCV? (.
Bows, axes and shields.
|
On March 26 2010 19:38 kickinhead wrote:
The whole patch was in the wrong direction:
- Everything leads to more massing of units...
Because?
As T, you don't use SCV's that creative anymore, or with much less impact, rines are worse, so you just spam Marauders etc. Maybe more Mech, which is kinda nice, but I think we'll see lots of
Marauder-pushes.
Try building stuff with your SCVs (this actually got harder though :p)
As P, you can't go DT's anymore, so you just spam mass-gates Stalkers/Zealots and Immos... with that, also Archons, which needed a buff, got worse, because DT's could morph into Archons. Observers were nerved, so you don't even go for them anymore, just pure stupid lowtier attackunit-masses.
DT nerf was weird for sure.
Observers were not nerfed, Archons did not get "worse", and not many built DTs anyways.
And how is 50 mins and 100 gass bad for an invisible scout with no other tech required?
As Z, well, Z is strongest race by far still...
Important fixes like Highground-advantage, much better static defense etc. haven't been addressed at all. First patch that is really disappointing to me, not because blizzard didn't magically balance the game, but because some "fixes" are just so bad an very important stuff hasn't been changed:
- FE-Zerg can still Zergling-rush a 2-gateing Protoss: Protoss cannot be aggressive early on in the game and they can't defend well either because cannons and zealots suck against speedlings/banelings/roaches/marauders...
- Banelings got even better? They need a nerf, not a buff - c'mon!
- Archons needed a buff.
- Tanks needed a buff specific to Tanks, not just mech overall, now we'll just see more Hellion-rushes...
- Queen needed a huge nerf.
- Marauders needed a nerf.
- Roaches needed nerf.
- Highground-advantage needs to be implemented.
- Bonus DMG against certain armor-types needs to be toned down quite a bit, maybe base-dmg higher or sth.
- Phoenix needed buff.
Roaches got a nerf, and bonus damage was reduced for several units. Regarding Protoss and defence, there was a fix for blocking units.
I'm not saying that all your points are wrong, but you might want to read the notes a few times before you post :p
|
On March 26 2010 20:06 lolaloc wrote:
The amount complaints in this thread makes me wanna wish that there should be a Blizzard representative posting in TL.net
and then you read the complaints and pray to god no one from blizzard ever checks the forum
|
On March 26 2010 20:24 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 20:06 lolaloc wrote:
The amount complaints in this thread makes me wanna wish that there should be a Blizzard representative posting in TL.net and then you read the complaints and pray to god no one from blizzard ever checks the forum
Wow, I was just about to write the same thing lol ^_^, you're reading my minds ]].
|
I got a virus from this patch... T.T
|
On March 26 2010 19:53 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 19:41 MeProU_Kor wrote:
@ people saying stalker got buffed: this is a joke! they just switched 2 attack points and removed +1 from upgrades = nerf! they are maybe better against less hp units (linge/marine) but still suck against every thing elae + at the moment u get +1 attack they are worse against armored units than they used to be before. Because clearly after patch 1, people never used Vikings again, amirite? Switching damage type to normal is a moderate buff. The Viking showed this in patch 1, where virtually the exact same damage change was made, but instead of change in upgrades, it was given an armor reduction. Subsequently it went from being almost never used to being seen commonly in 2 of the 3 matchups, and as a viable option in the 3rd. Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 19:41 MeProU_Kor wrote:
Im still missing a strong GtA unit for P (an no stalker got nerfed for this case, its only better against mutas + viking but suck even more against everythin with armor)! Aren't those the only two air units the Stalker has to fight most of the time in PvT and PvZ anyway?
Actually vikings weren't really buffed in that patch, it was more of a rework.
- They did get the nerf in upgrades in the same way stalkers did, it just wasn't in the patch notes. Before they were +1(+1 vs armored) and now they are +1(+0 vs armored).
- They got a slight nerf against armored targets, with no longer having upgrade vs armored and the base armor removal.
- The buff to base damage affected mainly mutas and phoenix, both of which were also heavily affected by the armor removal, so it wasn't a buff in direct combat against them either
- Vikings did become better at fending off muta harass, since they dealt higher damage to them, while they could sit inside turret/marine range and mutas would not return fire.
- People were simply still trying things out before the patch, and the patch got more attention to vikings more than it did to buff them.
BTW corruptors need a buff or a rework, since mutas are about as strong vs vikings as corruptors are and mutas are much more versatile.
Yes, toss needed something to counter light air, but IMO bonus to light for sentries(and more to armored for stalkers) would've been a better idea, giving more variety to the toss army and a counter to mass zeals, which they still lack(except if you make so much stalkers that the range advantage turns the balance of power around and air units of course, but they aren't a strong counter, except carriers, which are at the top of the tech tree).
|
Patch 6 is by far my favourite patch(and I play Terran, so that's saying something) because it has convinced me that Blizzard have a genuine passion towards creating an e-sport. It shows that they've not only been trying to balance the game based on builds used by the professionals and high ranking players, but they've also been attempting to maximise diversity and creativity in build orders to create an interesting sport for the players and the spectators.
Unlike the other patches this one actually contains quite a few technical changes to the game such as the visibility of zerg units change which assists both players and spectators greatly as well as changing unit pathing to allow units to block enemy units, a much needed change that Blizzard made from following the advice of top tier players.
Terrran:
Anybody who's been following the recent competitive SC2 scene at all (ZOTAC 4 and ESL Invitational) should have seen the effect of SCVs and marines in the early game of TvT, as well as the strength of the TvP double rax cheese. The changes to SCV health and marine build time show that Blizzard are actively monitoring the compeititive scene and watching tournament replays to balance the game, prioritising the pro scene over balancing it for the copper noobies.
The reactor build time change is one of the better ones in this patch because it puts more focus on actually swapping addons or creating an addon for a building before that building has finished construction. Before the patch it was taking you long enough to swap the addons of buildings that many players simply created new ones since it was only 25 seconds campared to 10-15 and required less actions to do. It creates a massive amount of possibilities for intricate build orders where there is actually a noticeable effect of swapping the addons on buildings. If Blizzard were to also increase Tech Lab build time it'd only increase this effect as well as being a small nerf to the incredibly strong TvP Marauder build that Lucifron used against Nazgul to 3-0 the recent ESL invitational finals.
Ghosts heavily influence the outcome of a TvP, if they get sniped then the Terran player had suffered a big loss, while on the other hand two EMPs were able to take away most of the health of an entire Protoss army. Shrinking the radius allows for an increase in micromanagement, requiring the Terran player to actually aim at High Templar and Immortals yet not having to invest such a large portion of his gas in the early mid game.
Making mech a viable strategic option is needed for Terran play. If all Terrans play bio because it's easier and more mobile it makes the game dull from the point of view of both a player and a spectator. The Marine balancing as well as the Factory and Viking cost changes should make going mech more enticing to players, the cost reduction on Ghosts means you might even be able to use one or two in a mech army to EMP any Immortals being used against your Tanks. Whether these mech changes work or not is yet to be seen.
Protoss:
Blizzard are trying to get Protoss to tech to robo a lot less. Pretty much every good Protoss is just going straight to robo after either 1 or 2 Gateways in vT and vZ and getting Immortals or Colossi. Observers were cheap and since the tech was there a Protoss would get them without a second thought for the resources invested.
The nerf to Colossi and Observers as well as the Stalker buff are encouraging more Protoss to go HTs with charge and blink upgrades on a Stalker / Zealot main army or maybe even Stalker / Zealot / Sentry. The stalker buff also means possibly less zealot spam in PvP, less single unit spam can't be a bad thing for the game.
Zerg:
The baneling change makes them more viable against large amounts of stalkers and tanks, the two units Blizzard want to see a lot more of in games and that we should expect to see more in games(since both stalkers and mech play have been buffed). Since bio armies will have a lot more marauders now due to the marine changes it also helps to keep TvZ balanced.
The roach regen change as well as the baneling changes seem like a small attempt to diversify the ZvZ matchup which was pretty much slanted towards roaches and hydras. It won't even it out much, but it's getting there.
Overall I find that Blizzard is heading in the right direction and believe that the game will be in good competitive shape by release day, they may yet change their mind on high ground mechanics and EU / US seperation!
|
There are some serious bad posts in this thread.
First thing that came to my mind:
Patch -> YES!
Patchlog -> Looking forward to play & test tonight!
End of story. You fucking crybabies. Give it some time to breath. Let the plays evolve first. Adapt to it and see where we land.
|
Protoss:
Blizzard are trying to get Protoss to tech to robo a lot less. [..] encouraging more Protoss to go HTs
If they are trying to make people go the templar tree then why did they nerf HT and massively nerf DTs?
Especially considering Protoss is considered the weakest race at the moment (which all statistics prove).
|
At first glance a lot of the changes are dead on, but then some just seem unwarranted.
That said, I'll wait before I play a lot of matches today before I say what I think is wrong about it, like many people in this thread should have.
|
I can't really tell if the stalker was buffed or nerfed. I guess it's buffed for early game, but severely hampered for lategame.
|
Why only 5 placement games? Ive now lost twice vs zergs with 50 APM simply cause zealots for some reason dont really block the ramp vs speedlings.. they just mass up 50 speedlings and atk. Can i scout what Z is doing? No. Can I move out with 5 zealots to try to raid? No. Chance is he has gone zerglings and not teching and if thats the case, i cant move out. Oh I went for observer who now is for some reason 50min 100gas. What did my observer do? What did my robo do? Nothing vs these disguisting rushes. That means ive lost 2 games of 2 played so far. I got 3 more to play and god knows i might even end up in bronze league if this crap continues.
If anything, the placements should be more than 25 games cause once your in gold/silver you cant move up it seems like.
What a crap.
|
On March 26 2010 20:06 lolaloc wrote:
The amount complaints in this thread makes me wanna wish that there should be a Blizzard representative posting in TL.net
yeah... a Blizzard representative with a banhammer lol
|
I noticed... performance improvements. Before I'm always at like 30fps, now without changing settings I'm at 50? plus faster loading times.
Sweeettt
|
On March 26 2010 13:16 Zato-1 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 13:12 CharlieMurphy wrote:On March 26 2010 12:36 Spinel720 wrote:
I still don't know how to deal with CharlieMurphy's "Mustaches" brood lords still gonna be able to kill me :/ gotta get carriers and mofo ship imo, I think a few archons might actually help to defend the stalkers from broodlings too. Are carriers really viable considering the huge damage bonus Corruptors get against them?
well people still make colossus even though corruptors get that damage boost too. Carriers are more mobile, longer range, can draw fire of corruptors to ceptors, and have more hp iirc. So yea, they are pretty decent unless the zerg has enough corruptors to 1 shot a carrier.
|
On March 26 2010 21:11 _EmIL_ wrote:
Why only 5 placement games? Ive now lost twice vs zergs with 50 APM simply cause zealots for some reason dont really block the ramp vs speedlings.. they just mass up 50 speedlings and atk. Can i scout what Z is doing? No. Can I move out with 5 zealots to try to raid? No. Chance is he has gone zerglings and not teching and if thats the case, i cant move out. Oh I went for observer who now is for some reason 50min 100gas. What did my observer do? What did my robo do? Nothing vs these disguisting rushes. That means ive lost 2 games of 2 played so far. I got 3 more to play and god knows i might even end up in bronze league if this crap continues.
If anything, the placements should be more than 25 games cause once your in gold/silver you cant move up it seems like.
What a crap.
The matchmaking and ranking system is not geared as it will be in the final release. For example right now when you click 'find a game' it only looks for some1 in your skill bracket then quickly expands the search to get you into a game fast. When they release the game it will wait a lot longer before starting an expanded search. I am sure the 5 games is also just for ease of play for beta players, and not intended as a new matchmaking balance.
|
On March 26 2010 21:36 MiyaviTeddy wrote:
I noticed... performance improvements. Before I'm always at like 30fps, now without changing settings I'm at 50? plus faster loading times.
Sweeettt
me too! ^^
|
On March 26 2010 21:40 DeCoup wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 21:11 _EmIL_ wrote:
Why only 5 placement games? Ive now lost twice vs zergs with 50 APM simply cause zealots for some reason dont really block the ramp vs speedlings.. they just mass up 50 speedlings and atk. Can i scout what Z is doing? No. Can I move out with 5 zealots to try to raid? No. Chance is he has gone zerglings and not teching and if thats the case, i cant move out. Oh I went for observer who now is for some reason 50min 100gas. What did my observer do? What did my robo do? Nothing vs these disguisting rushes. That means ive lost 2 games of 2 played so far. I got 3 more to play and god knows i might even end up in bronze league if this crap continues.
If anything, the placements should be more than 25 games cause once your in gold/silver you cant move up it seems like.
What a crap. The matchmaking and ranking system is not geared as it will be in the final release. For example right now when you click 'find a game' it only looks for some1 in your skill bracket then quickly expands the search to get you into a game fast. When they release the game it will wait a lot longer before starting an expanded search. I am sure the 5 games is also just for ease of play for beta players, and not intended as a new matchmaking balance.
Well, id rather spend my 3 months of playing on the beta with playing vs better/same skill level as me. I just had some error with the game and now it doesnt even launch. I found a game to play on the matchmaking and before i could see my nexus and probes i get the error. Pretty sure tahts another loss on this worst fkn morning ever. Now i have 3 losses, no game was over 6 minutes lol.
I wanna go to my fridge and throw the cheese out of the balcony
|
This is a good patch . DTs were a bitch to handle as T in a midgame tech switch, this should ease the pain. The marine / SCV / reactor nerf is for those gay TvP rushes, also needed.
The stalker buff is spot on, I think I mentioned the exact same thing on various forums
I don't get it, what's the whine about?
Oh and I play Protoss.
|
Marshall Islands104 Posts
Perhaps we are taking this too seriously :p
Blizzard knows that good players will figure out how to win. That means anything too weak will never be used. So, they make a drastic change on purpose to force the good players to incorporate these units/strategies into their play.
In a week or two a new patch will come out with new, more moderate changes.
...
Then the next week.
...
And the next.
|
On March 26 2010 21:11 _EmIL_ wrote:
Why only 5 placement games? Ive now lost twice vs zergs with 50 APM simply cause zealots for some reason dont really block the ramp vs speedlings.. they just mass up 50 speedlings and atk. Can i scout what Z is doing? No. Can I move out with 5 zealots to try to raid? No. Chance is he has gone zerglings and not teching and if thats the case, i cant move out. Oh I went for observer who now is for some reason 50min 100gas. What did my observer do? What did my robo do? Nothing vs these disguisting rushes. That means ive lost 2 games of 2 played so far. I got 3 more to play and god knows i might even end up in bronze league if this crap continues.
If anything, the placements should be more than 25 games cause once your in gold/silver you cant move up it seems like.
What a crap.
Maybe you should, uhm, scout what the Zerg is doing and act accordingly instead of building 5 Zealots against 50 Zerglings and then Complain? He just could have gotten a few Banelings in there and your Choke would have broken anyway?
|
Mister cool, tell me how to scout? I did observer asap but its too late. Did you read what I wrote? Since zergling catch up on both probe and zealot its pretty much impossible to scout him without observer/phoenix.
The other guy I played got few banelings but also then I put 3 cannons(scrap station) but still zergling run through zealots for some reason. I kinda killed that army but since 10 speedlings just ran to my nexus and got down a lot of probes I couldnt catch up.
Thing is, if P is supposed to put up a lot of cannons every game then that is not balanced in any way. Feels like Z has to many options to make vs P and P scouts Z a bit too late. Do you think Bisu would have had a chance vs Jaedong if zerglings were faster than his probe? No. To make zerglings faster than probes is the biggest mistake of this game in the PvZ MU
|
On March 26 2010 20:24 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 20:06 lolaloc wrote:
The amount complaints in this thread makes me wanna wish that there should be a Blizzard representative posting in TL.net and then you read the complaints and pray to god no one from blizzard ever checks the forum
Nah.. he would be more useful by explaining the logic behind every changes made.
|
unit voice still the same ...oh noooo
requareeeee moreeeeeeeee minirııılssss..
|
On March 26 2010 08:57 notrangerjoe wrote:nnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I'm not sure exactly why, but this makes me really really sad.
FINALLY
After 12 years they finally found out that scvs are imba!
Also i agree with every change, but the pathfindig nerf. Now protosses can be greedy bitches once again
|
so i dunno how it goes for you guys, but 3 out of 3 zergs i have faced since the baneling buff did mass speed/banelings and i died instantly.
i always go early gate vs zerg to be safe against rushes and then add another 1-3 depending on how late his pool is so that i can pressure his expansion or fend off / be able to move out against zerglings at all.
now zealots are utterly useless against banelings. you could block your ramp with sentries, but that way you cant move out at all, you cant expo either while zerg can comfortably take the whole map.
how do you deal with mass speedlings without relying on zealots? 1base psistorm or something?
so the patch just came out, it has been only 3 pvz so far for me and i will see how other players handle this, but the first impression tells me that pvz seems kind of broken now.
(i was placed in platinum when the beta launched and my highest rank there was rank 7 or something after patch 5 with some 150 games played, im in gold now after losing the fifth placement game)
|
Surprised they buffed banelings, also I wonder how many bunker rushes are going to happen now TT
|
On March 26 2010 22:10 enzym wrote:
so i dunno how it goes for you guys, but 3 out of 3 zergs i have faced since the baneling buff did mass speed/banelings and i died instantly.
i always go early gate vs zerg to be safe against rushes and then add another 1-3 depending on how late his pool is so that i can pressure his expansion or fend off / be able to move out against zerglings at all.
now zealots are utterly useless against banelings. you could block your ramp with sentries, but that way you cant move out at all, you cant expo either while zerg can comfortably take the whole map.
how do you deal with mass speedlings without relying on zealots? 1base psistorm or something?
so the patch just came out, it has been only 3 pvz so far for me and i will see how other players handle this, but the first impression tells me that pvz seems kind of broken now.
(i was placed in platinum when the beta launched and my highest rank there was rank 7 or something after patch 5 with some 150 games played, im in gold now after losing the fifth placement game)
The changes do not affect the scenario you describe at all. Banelings do not do more dmg against light units (e.g. Zealots) than before. Also you should get +1 melee quickly and spread your zealots out when fighting. Then banelings are anything but cost effective.
And yes, sentries rape zerglings if played right.
|
On March 26 2010 22:08 Geo.Rion wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 08:57 notrangerjoe wrote:o SCV
+ Life decreased from 60 to 45. nnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I'm not sure exactly why, but this makes me really really sad. FINALLY After 12 years they finally found out that scvs are imba! Also i agree with every change, but the pathfindig nerf. Now protosses can be greedy bitches once again
Speedlings still run through the zealot "walls"
|
On March 26 2010 22:21 Artrey wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 22:10 enzym wrote:
so i dunno how it goes for you guys, but 3 out of 3 zergs i have faced since the baneling buff did mass speed/banelings and i died instantly.
i always go early gate vs zerg to be safe against rushes and then add another 1-3 depending on how late his pool is so that i can pressure his expansion or fend off / be able to move out against zerglings at all.
now zealots are utterly useless against banelings. you could block your ramp with sentries, but that way you cant move out at all, you cant expo either while zerg can comfortably take the whole map.
how do you deal with mass speedlings without relying on zealots? 1base psistorm or something?
so the patch just came out, it has been only 3 pvz so far for me and i will see how other players handle this, but the first impression tells me that pvz seems kind of broken now.
(i was placed in platinum when the beta launched and my highest rank there was rank 7 or something after patch 5 with some 150 games played, im in gold now after losing the fifth placement game) The changes do not affect the scenario you describe at all. Banelings do not do more dmg against light units (e.g. Zealots) than before. Also you should get +1 melee quickly and spread your zealots out when fighting. Then banelings are anything but cost effective. And yes, sentries rape zerglings if played right. it affects the scenario in the following way: i never encountered them once in 150 games before the patch, but in 3 out of 3 pvz games after the patch. maybe its bad luck or noone thought about it earlier, but it seems theyre being used more frequently now. dont ask me why, im not a zerg.
so how is one supposed to handle this?
|
I didn't have a chance to play after the patch yet. Does anybody have anything to say about the new pathfinding? Is it really changed? Can you block ramps vs zerglings?
|
|
|
Nice patch. The colossus nerf might be the best part. Nor colossi dont onehit marines and twohit hydralisks.
|
On March 26 2010 22:22 _EmIL_ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 22:08 Geo.Rion wrote:On March 26 2010 08:57 notrangerjoe wrote:o SCV
+ Life decreased from 60 to 45. nnnnnnnnNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I'm not sure exactly why, but this makes me really really sad. FINALLY After 12 years they finally found out that scvs are imba! Also i agree with every change, but the pathfindig nerf. Now protosses can be greedy bitches once again Speedlings still run through the zealot "walls"
No they do not. Tested. Was watching orb's stream earlier and he could block off the ramp on Steppes of War with 3 zealots. Had a Z player rush him with mass lings and none would go through.
If you failed, I'm guessing you thought you'd only need 2 like in bw.
|
On March 26 2010 22:48 Slunk wrote:
Nice patch. The colossus nerf might be the best part. Nor colossi dont onehit marines and twohit hydralisks.
But who wanders around with only 1 colossus?
|
btw i dont know where blizz makes their decisions from but i hope its not from their general forums.. i just read a post about a guy complaining how overpowered thors are. do they actually read TL?
|
On March 26 2010 23:03 kilika wrote:
btw i dont know where blizz makes their decisions from but i hope its not from their general forums.. i just read a post about a guy complaining how overpowered thors are. do they actually read TL?
Do you mean blizzard? They do read TL, but it's probably more as a personal preference rather than a part of their job. FrozenArbiter gives them monthly feedback. TL has submitted feedback on SC2 for around 3 years (roughly since it was announced).
Maybe they have 1 dedicated guy at work reading 1/2 fansites on a basis, but I dunno.
Blizzard forums were a cesspool of shit since Warcraft 3 trolls started to troll and spam other boards. Now the blizz forums consist of trolls, wowtards that cry nerf at everything but can't image they're not winning because it might be their 1st RTS game, and a few poor lost souls, that genuinely want to give feedback / have a mature discussion but don't know any good communities that deal in Blizz RTS departments.
|
12 years of buff scvs vulnerable with no regen,....and now..
|
On March 26 2010 22:51 anotherone wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 22:48 Slunk wrote:
Nice patch. The colossus nerf might be the best part. Nor colossi dont onehit marines and twohit hydralisks. But who wanders around with only 1 colossus?
Are you naturally that stupid or it's through hard practice?
|
Earlier Hellions are buffed now with the reduced Factory timing.
|
On March 26 2010 22:39 enzym wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 22:21 Artrey wrote:On March 26 2010 22:10 enzym wrote:
so i dunno how it goes for you guys, but 3 out of 3 zergs i have faced since the baneling buff did mass speed/banelings and i died instantly.
i always go early gate vs zerg to be safe against rushes and then add another 1-3 depending on how late his pool is so that i can pressure his expansion or fend off / be able to move out against zerglings at all.
now zealots are utterly useless against banelings. you could block your ramp with sentries, but that way you cant move out at all, you cant expo either while zerg can comfortably take the whole map.
how do you deal with mass speedlings without relying on zealots? 1base psistorm or something?
so the patch just came out, it has been only 3 pvz so far for me and i will see how other players handle this, but the first impression tells me that pvz seems kind of broken now.
(i was placed in platinum when the beta launched and my highest rank there was rank 7 or something after patch 5 with some 150 games played, im in gold now after losing the fifth placement game) The changes do not affect the scenario you describe at all. Banelings do not do more dmg against light units (e.g. Zealots) than before. Also you should get +1 melee quickly and spread your zealots out when fighting. Then banelings are anything but cost effective. And yes, sentries rape zerglings if played right. it affects the scenario in the following way: i never encountered them once in 150 games before the patch, but in 3 out of 3 pvz games after the patch. maybe its bad luck or noone thought about it earlier, but it seems theyre being used more frequently now. dont ask me why, im not a zerg. so how is one supposed to handle this?
So you haven't encountered them once in 150 games which means you have no idea how to actually play against them so when they were actually used you got rolled because it was new to you.
That's how this reads to me.
|
Well I haven't read all 25 pages of DT nerf whine yet, but has anyone even considered the buff they got through the SCV hp nerf?
DTs can now one-shot SCVs without any upgrades (took them 3 melee upgrades to one-shot SCVs last patch), I guess quite a few Ts will learn that the hard way over the next weeks.
|
And just save 50 energy to be save... Wow.. What a big deal.
|
thats how it goes, Iv been in several blizz betas and many times patches dont seem to make sense at first, but it comes together in the end, have some faith :p also I dont bealive this is a nerf to terran like so many others bealive, it anything its a buff, mech ghost and vikings all got gas reduction..that is huge.
so what the scv doesnt have 60hp anymore, hurts because we'r used to it but scv rushes were getting out of hand...Im glad to see they will be easier to stop, also Toss players !!!...stalker got the huge buff you have been wanting for so long, be happy about that.
obbservers have been overpowred for a while..tier1 invisible mobile detector, consider what terran has to do to get to that, rax - factory - starport+techlab - fusion core + build a raven.
|
So now it takes pretty much the same amount of time to make a reactor as it takes to make a whole new barracks, and in the latter case you can still build from the unupgraded barrack. What the fuck was the reasoning here?
|
On March 26 2010 23:47 Velr wrote:
And just save 50 energy to be save... Wow.. What a big deal.
Yeah, because you'll always notice DTs in your mineral line right away, even when fighting a major battle.
|
On March 26 2010 23:49 arnold(soTa) wrote:
thats how it goes, Iv been in several blizz betas and many times patches dont seem to make sense at first, but it comes together in the end, have some faith :p also I dont bealive this is a nerf to terran like so many others bealive, it anything its a buff, mech ghost and vikings all got gas reduction..that is huge.
so what the scv doesnt have 60hp anymore, hurts because we'r used to it but scv rushes were getting out of hand...Im glad to see they will be easier to stop, also Toss players !!!...stalker got the huge buff you have been wanting for so long, be happy about that.
obbservers have been overpowred for a while..tier1 invisible mobile detector, consider what terran has to do to get to that, rax - factory - starport+techlab - fusion core + build a raven.
Lol. Consider what Protoss has to get too, Pylon -> Gateway -> Cyber Core -> Robo Bay.
You're also ignoring the fact that Ravens are support units with spells, and observers are not.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On March 26 2010 23:45 Lyrok wrote:
Well I haven't read all 25 pages of DT nerf whine yet, but has anyone even considered the buff they got through the SCV hp nerf?
DTs can now one-shot SCVs without any upgrades (took them 3 melee upgrades to one-shot SCVs last patch), I guess quite a few Ts will learn that the hard way over the next weeks.
So let's nerf the DT because we nerfed the SCV without a care in the world for how it's going to affect PvZ. Awesome logic. DTs were far more viable against Zerg than they were Terran imo.
|
On March 27 2010 00:07 Plexa wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 23:45 Lyrok wrote:
Well I haven't read all 25 pages of DT nerf whine yet, but has anyone even considered the buff they got through the SCV hp nerf?
DTs can now one-shot SCVs without any upgrades (took them 3 melee upgrades to one-shot SCVs last patch), I guess quite a few Ts will learn that the hard way over the next weeks. So let's nerf the DT because we nerfed the SCV without a care in the world for how it's going to affect PvZ. Awesome logic. DTs were far more viable against Zerg than they were Terran imo.
Yeah,terran can use scan anytime anywhere.. zerg needs to move overseer.
|
This patch makes me think that Artosis had something to do with it.
|
On March 27 2010 00:07 Plexa wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 23:45 Lyrok wrote:
Well I haven't read all 25 pages of DT nerf whine yet, but has anyone even considered the buff they got through the SCV hp nerf?
DTs can now one-shot SCVs without any upgrades (took them 3 melee upgrades to one-shot SCVs last patch), I guess quite a few Ts will learn that the hard way over the next weeks. So let's nerf the DT because we nerfed the SCV without a care in the world for how it's going to affect PvZ. Awesome logic. DTs were far more viable against Zerg than they were Terran imo.
What are you talking about? I just said that, although DTs have been nerfed by adding them to light and increasing dark shrine build time / cost, it should also be noted that they can now be better used to eco harass a T then before.
|
at that time where you get a dt without going for a total cheese build the terran will have like 2 running expos and one of them with pf and turret. gl in harassing the natural (rallypoint) and the main rofl.
edit
would be interesting to know if you get a message + ping on minimap if your units get one hitted or one hit = no message like in sc1
|
|
|
I'm so glad they buffed stalkers. None of this patch really bothers me. Not even the Dark Shrine thing. The obs thing kind of sucks... but over all im ok with this.
|
Reactors are not useless now, building barracks requires SCVs and more time, plus you can still build reactors on rax and move them to fact/port as soon as it finishes.
But the DT nerf is IMO pointless (I actually hoped they would decrease the gas cost/time as they were too slow). Almost all terran tech now, so they can just build one raven and push you. Even if you don't lose instantly you still wasted a lot of gas/time and you just lost all your map control that you had with DTs. Observers/overseers are even easier to get.
|
On March 26 2010 16:16 zee wrote:
wait... they buffed banelings? :I like they werent imba enough!
They weren't.
it just increases the damage vs armored so they might be more viable vs protoss, cuz they were useless for their cost.
|
On March 26 2010 23:49 arnold(soTa) wrote:
obbservers have been overpowred for a while..tier1 invisible mobile detector, consider what terran has to do to get to that, rax - factory - starport+techlab - fusion core + build a raven.
Observers are Tier 2.
Stalker change is interesting. It makes them more effective vs light units the entire game, but less effective vs heavy except at the start. So later game, when upgrades are expected, Stalkers are worse.
Now, I don't mind Stalkers losing a bit of effectiveness versus armored ground. There's the Immortal after all. But what about air?
Should your opponent go Broodlords or BCs for some reason, Stalkers are less effective (except against the Broodlings, I guess). I'm not sure if this will be an issue, but something to keep in mind.
|
On March 27 2010 01:03 SLush wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 16:16 zee wrote:
wait... they buffed banelings? :I like they werent imba enough! They weren't. it just increases the damage vs armored so maybe a little bit more viable vs protoss, cuz they were useless for they cost.
Makes it pretty viable to break a Terran wall and then get right at a bio ball. In fact, I've seen this in every single TvZ I've played today in Platinum :O
|
SCV nerf is HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE fail. Very hard FE now
|
On March 27 2010 01:07 choboPEon wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 01:03 SLush wrote:On March 26 2010 16:16 zee wrote:
wait... they buffed banelings? :I like they werent imba enough! They weren't. it just increases the damage vs armored so maybe a little bit more viable vs protoss, cuz they were useless for they cost. Makes it pretty viable to break a Terran wall and then get right at a bio ball. In fact, I've seen this in every single TvZ I've played today in Platinum :O
That's because you dont know how to defend urself. Don't blame on imbalance if you dont know how to play yet.
If you were new to Broodwar you would call a lot of imbalance. But people says the game is perfectly balanced right?
|
On March 27 2010 01:11 SLush wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 01:07 choboPEon wrote:On March 27 2010 01:03 SLush wrote:On March 26 2010 16:16 zee wrote:
wait... they buffed banelings? :I like they werent imba enough! They weren't. it just increases the damage vs armored so maybe a little bit more viable vs protoss, cuz they were useless for they cost. Makes it pretty viable to break a Terran wall and then get right at a bio ball. In fact, I've seen this in every single TvZ I've played today in Platinum :O That's because you dont know how to defend urself. Don't blame on imbalance if you dont know how to play yet. If you were new to Broodwar you would call a lot of imbalance. But people says the game is perfectly balanced right?
so tell me what am i supposed to do vs that then, i can wall in and sit there like retard making units when zerg takes whole map(also no fkn idea which units to make, mmm ball is raped by bene+hydra+roach, add infestor for extra humiliation) tanks are expensive as fuck and when i manage to gather decent amount of them zerg has whole map and can just roll over me with whatever he wants from his hive tech
|
From what I'm seeing from Merz's Channel, viking harass against overlords works wonders. (Overlords are slow as heck, Z have not caught on yet that they need to hide their ovies, though once viking comes they put their ovies next to spores or hydras) Delays the Zerg getting a big enough swarm enough to push out with MMM and stim their way through.
|
On March 27 2010 01:11 SLush wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 01:07 choboPEon wrote:On March 27 2010 01:03 SLush wrote:On March 26 2010 16:16 zee wrote:
wait... they buffed banelings? :I like they werent imba enough! They weren't. it just increases the damage vs armored so maybe a little bit more viable vs protoss, cuz they were useless for they cost. Makes it pretty viable to break a Terran wall and then get right at a bio ball. In fact, I've seen this in every single TvZ I've played today in Platinum :O That's because you dont know how to defend urself. Don't blame on imbalance if you dont know how to play yet. If you were new to Broodwar you would call a lot of imbalance. But people says the game is perfectly balanced right?
I'm sorry, did I say imbalance? No, just that it's viable vs. a wall/bio ball. I'm saying I'm having trouble with it.
Talk to him about imbalance, I said nothing except that I see it in every single game and am a bit baffled right now.
|
terran is the weakest race now. mech is still not viable.
|
Too many Korean's cheese-rushing with SCVs + marines... Well I think Blizzard went SEVERE overkill on this patch. Double the time to build a reactor core... Fine... Understandable... Kinda. Reduce SCV HP... Fine... Seems fair....
But to top it all off adding 25% build time to all marines for the entire game duration is ridiculous. If cheese-rushing was the problem, they should have increased barracks build time by 10-15 seconds or something... By making marines take 5 seconds longer to build... That now means to get JUST 10 marines takes literally 50 seconds longer! Which 50 seconds in a "game of seconds" is a HUGE deal...
M&M - no longer viable.
Mech - still not viable...
Banshee-rushing every game anyone?!
Terran = broken now. Thanks Korean-Cheesers.
|
On March 27 2010 01:11 SLush wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 01:07 choboPEon wrote:On March 27 2010 01:03 SLush wrote:On March 26 2010 16:16 zee wrote:
wait... they buffed banelings? :I like they werent imba enough! They weren't. it just increases the damage vs armored so maybe a little bit more viable vs protoss, cuz they were useless for they cost. Makes it pretty viable to break a Terran wall and then get right at a bio ball. In fact, I've seen this in every single TvZ I've played today in Platinum :O That's because you dont know how to defend urself. Don't blame on imbalance if you dont know how to play yet. If you were new to Broodwar you would call a lot of imbalance. But people says the game is perfectly balanced right?
yeah its definitely him just being bad
dimaga didnt roll over every terran barring demuslim (who did a build exclusively to hard counter it, that would put him behind if he didnt know it was coming) in the last zotac cup using this build, definitely not
|
Terran gets a balanced worker and a balanced tier 1 unit, and now it's unplayable? Beats me. Reactor + Marines caused incredible amounts of early-game Marines, which could only be matched by the Zerg making incredible amounts of Zerglings (which happen to melt away against larger numbers of marines). If the Rax time itself was increased, any build that DIDN'T rely on Marines would suffer.
Note that Hellion harass is made much more viable with these changes, while not being overshadowed by Marines; Infernal Preigniters can be researched quicker with the total cost of a FacLab being 200/125, instead of 250/150. Now that Templar are counted as light, Hellions are quite effective at slipping past the main army and sniping them.
It's Blizzard's "subtle" way of making a push towards mech, not to mention that Vikings cost less gas now. Viking on the ground is basically a mech unit that is better than the Stalker in many, many ways.
|
On March 27 2010 02:52 Tropics wrote:yeah its definitely him just being bad
dimaga didnt roll over every terran barring demuslim (who did a build exclusively to hard counter it, that would put him behind if he didnt know it was coming) in the last zotac cup using this build, definitely not
Your example isn't proving the point you're trying to make since demuslim walled in a more effective way vs banelings which nullified the strat, in other words it's not imbalanced
|
This "view profile" feature does not work for me at all. I just cannot click on it. Have I just played people who are not ranked until now or does it just not work ?
|
The 20-->25 sec build time increase on the marine doesn't seem that huge. To make 20 marines in 100 seconds, before you needed 4 rax, now you need 5 rax.
|
I'm sorry but 50 minerals makes maybe like a 2 second faster hellion, and if you want a reactor its gonna take even longer. They hardly buff mech and nerf bio to oblivion
|
I wonder how the SCV and Marine nerfs affect defending cheeses like 6-pool. Anybody has already some experience?
|
ill copy paste one of my posts from another thread here,
putting the dts debate aside(because i still have not seen enought to comment on it), p still doesnt have a good all around ground unit(med tech unit from basic buildings aka gateway for p with good range that attacks air/flying and counters a decent amount of units, basically that can be used against every race) like the other races
also stalker vs zealot is ridiculous, its handicaping pvp.. theres so little diversity in the mu
|
I think people are really overreacting about this baneling buff. I mean, they're good vs rines becaues they splash and rines have low hp. That won't change at all. Marauders are bigger and have more hp so they spread out splash and also take less damage.
Pre change:
15-1 = 14 damage vs a marauder
= 9 banelings to kill a 125 hp 1 armour marauder. (A bit more efficient when bunched but big marauder frames really means you won't splash that much.
500 mins 225 gas. WAY MORE THAN A COLOSSUS to take down one marauder. (Because of the way splash works you would need more to take down like 3 marauders as well)
Post change:
20-1 = 19 damage vs a marauder.
=7 banelings to kill a 1 armour marauder
=350 mins 175 gas. MAYBE efficient in terms of minerals but never in terms of gas.
So you still REALLY need to micro them against marauder/marine because you can blow enough banelings to kill all his marines and kill only a couple marauders.
Result: Banelings are still worthless except really for marine hard counter, and maybe zealot/templar counter as well, and also baneling bombs on workers might be deadly. Still ridiculously inefficient vs anything not light, no real change. No doubt, they are still amazingly effective vs marines and I really hate this emphasis on mass marauder, it's already popular and got buffed. I was always a marine fan. Really weak vs splash but more firepower.
Other changes:
Double hellion harass openings nerfed a lot, my version used 5 rines to harass early which is not viable at all with slowed rine production/reactor production.
Slower rine/reactor production also means more minerals for teching. They probably want to encourage that.
Terrans given a lot more gas to encourage raven/ghost usage,
More minerals used with your vikings/ghosts means smaller core unit groups.
ZvZ:
Roach burrow now largely going to be unused. I never saw any real abuse of burrow micro so I always felt burrow being too weak not too strong, since you also lose the units firepower when you burrow it.
|
On March 27 2010 02:52 Tropics wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 01:11 SLush wrote:On March 27 2010 01:07 choboPEon wrote:On March 27 2010 01:03 SLush wrote:On March 26 2010 16:16 zee wrote:
wait... they buffed banelings? :I like they werent imba enough! They weren't. it just increases the damage vs armored so maybe a little bit more viable vs protoss, cuz they were useless for they cost. Makes it pretty viable to break a Terran wall and then get right at a bio ball. In fact, I've seen this in every single TvZ I've played today in Platinum :O That's because you dont know how to defend urself. Don't blame on imbalance if you dont know how to play yet. If you were new to Broodwar you would call a lot of imbalance. But people says the game is perfectly balanced right? yeah its definitely him just being bad dimaga didnt roll over every terran barring demuslim (who did a build exclusively to hard counter it, that would put him behind if he didnt know it was coming) in the last zotac cup using this build, definitely not
Just wall with 2 buildings (no supply depot).
You have to think outside of the box here AKA not like SC1.
|
On March 27 2010 03:47 SLush wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 02:52 Tropics wrote:On March 27 2010 01:11 SLush wrote:On March 27 2010 01:07 choboPEon wrote:On March 27 2010 01:03 SLush wrote:On March 26 2010 16:16 zee wrote:
wait... they buffed banelings? :I like they werent imba enough! They weren't. it just increases the damage vs armored so maybe a little bit more viable vs protoss, cuz they were useless for they cost. Makes it pretty viable to break a Terran wall and then get right at a bio ball. In fact, I've seen this in every single TvZ I've played today in Platinum :O That's because you dont know how to defend urself. Don't blame on imbalance if you dont know how to play yet. If you were new to Broodwar you would call a lot of imbalance. But people says the game is perfectly balanced right? yeah its definitely him just being bad dimaga didnt roll over every terran barring demuslim (who did a build exclusively to hard counter it, that would put him behind if he didnt know it was coming) in the last zotac cup using this build, definitely not Just wall with 2 buildings (no supply depot). You have to think outside of the box here AKA not like SC1.
Funny how Blizzard themselves advocate for walling with supply depots by the submerging mechanics. Oh well, it could have worked if they also didn't make them paperthin at the same time.
|
SCV Nerf happened because of the Marine+SCV all-in rushes.
Well deserved.
|
Although I am protoss, and agree that emp needed to be nerfed, I don't think blizzard or many other people period considered the magnitude of the change that was made. I imagine the conversation balance testers had about emp :
Tester 1 : Emp so imba
Tester 2 : I know rite, why don't we nerf it, and take its aoe down from 3 to 2?
Tester 1 : Yah sounds good, lets go tell the programmers, then go on break!
Apparently blizzard balance testers don't remember algebra from high school...
*AOE Change from 3 to 2, means that the diameter of the AOE is now 2 instead of 3. This means that the radius of the emp becomes 1, instead of 1.5. Result? The area of effect is now about 3.14, compared to an original 7.1. The original EMP was TWICE as powerful as the new emp! Watching orb's stream last night, in a TvP match, the terran player's emps were very ineffective, and I'm pretty sure my logic explains that.
|
On March 27 2010 03:53 adelarge wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 03:47 SLush wrote:On March 27 2010 02:52 Tropics wrote:On March 27 2010 01:11 SLush wrote:On March 27 2010 01:07 choboPEon wrote:On March 27 2010 01:03 SLush wrote:On March 26 2010 16:16 zee wrote:
wait... they buffed banelings? :I like they werent imba enough! They weren't. it just increases the damage vs armored so maybe a little bit more viable vs protoss, cuz they were useless for they cost. Makes it pretty viable to break a Terran wall and then get right at a bio ball. In fact, I've seen this in every single TvZ I've played today in Platinum :O That's because you dont know how to defend urself. Don't blame on imbalance if you dont know how to play yet. If you were new to Broodwar you would call a lot of imbalance. But people says the game is perfectly balanced right? yeah its definitely him just being bad dimaga didnt roll over every terran barring demuslim (who did a build exclusively to hard counter it, that would put him behind if he didnt know it was coming) in the last zotac cup using this build, definitely not Just wall with 2 buildings (no supply depot). You have to think outside of the box here AKA not like SC1. Funny how Blizzard themselves advocate for walling with supply depots by the submerging mechanics. Oh well, it could have worked if they also didn't make them paperthin at the same time.
Funny how you can make exactly the same argument with raxes and factories being able to fly!!
|
On March 27 2010 03:25 palanq wrote:
The 20-->25 sec build time increase on the marine doesn't seem that huge. To make 20 marines in 100 seconds, before you needed 4 rax, now you need 5 rax.
Thats because game plays on faster settings, meaning its not 5s actually, but you have to apply 133% game speed.
So in reality Marines build around 3,4s slower.
|
im not really sure what steps im going to take as terran. My fast expo strat isnt really viable anymore. And its hard to scout the expo timing properly, when they can just expo after they kill the scv. So it seems terran is gonna have to play a safe 1 base for awhile.
But the biggest problem to me is when you feel your opp is making alot of lings. and you decide to go hellions and expo. which seems pretty standard... if he has a few roaches when i get there my harass is in vain and he can follow up with a push.. and if i dont have like 12 marauders i lose right there... so im not 100% sure on what we're expected to do... PF expand i suppose.. cant really see orbital working too well on some maps like blistering sands and scrap station
|
On March 27 2010 03:12 hugman wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 02:52 Tropics wrote:yeah its definitely him just being bad
dimaga didnt roll over every terran barring demuslim (who did a build exclusively to hard counter it, that would put him behind if he didnt know it was coming) in the last zotac cup using this build, definitely not Your example isn't proving the point you're trying to make since demuslim walled in a more effective way vs banelings which nullified the strat, in other words it's not imbalanced
Your logic is flawed here. "Can be countered" doesn't mean there is balance. You have to consider what lengths you have to go through in order to counter it, and then decide if that is reasonable. It's the same argument regarding microing vs banelings as well. If the terran has to work 5 times harder (or in this case, heavily restrict their build) just to produce a neutral outcome, there is something wrong.
On March 27 2010 04:11 Defrag wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 03:25 palanq wrote:
The 20-->25 sec build time increase on the marine doesn't seem that huge. To make 20 marines in 100 seconds, before you needed 4 rax, now you need 5 rax. Thats because game plays on faster settings, meaning its not 5s actually, but you have to apply 133% game speed. So in reality Marines build around 3,4s slower.
The percentage increase still remains the same, regardless of how much faster the time is. When you would normally have made 5 marines, now you will have 4.
|
read 4 pages of comments, so I don't know if I'm repeating anyone, but DT nerf is probably cuz marines got nerfed pretty badly. By reducing marine amounts in armies, DT marine sniping becomes more powerful, so hence the de-buff.
It wouldn't be so bad if DT's didn't already cost an arm and a leg.
|
On March 27 2010 03:47 SLush wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 02:52 Tropics wrote:On March 27 2010 01:11 SLush wrote:On March 27 2010 01:07 choboPEon wrote:On March 27 2010 01:03 SLush wrote:On March 26 2010 16:16 zee wrote:
wait... they buffed banelings? :I like they werent imba enough! They weren't. it just increases the damage vs armored so maybe a little bit more viable vs protoss, cuz they were useless for they cost. Makes it pretty viable to break a Terran wall and then get right at a bio ball. In fact, I've seen this in every single TvZ I've played today in Platinum :O That's because you dont know how to defend urself. Don't blame on imbalance if you dont know how to play yet. If you were new to Broodwar you would call a lot of imbalance. But people says the game is perfectly balanced right? yeah its definitely him just being bad dimaga didnt roll over every terran barring demuslim (who did a build exclusively to hard counter it, that would put him behind if he didnt know it was coming) in the last zotac cup using this build, definitely not Just wall with 2 buildings (no supply depot). You have to think outside of the box here AKA not like SC1.
u are from wc3 and obiously have no clue about sc bw
|
On March 27 2010 03:55 tyreek wrote:
SCV Nerf happened because of the Marine+SCV all-in rushes.
Well deserved.
You cut an SCV to start up your production slightly earlier because you won't need the small amount of income you'll lose and it'll compensate for the sligthly slower marine build time and you get the same 4 min all-in versus protoss. SCV hp nerf barely affects the end results, the marines still cut down Zealots and probes so fast with the SCV meatshield. It's one less zealot hit an SCV can take and a little less effective toe to toe with probes, which translates to just using a tiny bit more micro on the SCVs. Of my TvP so far where Toss doesn't go forge, they've all been won with the all-in.
Poorly thought out fix.
|
Terran took a damn bullet...it's pain in the ass now. @ 1200+ though
|
I'm trying to figure out why Barracks should ever have Reactors now. It's slightly more expensive but a Rax+Lab is just as easy/quick to build and you can make Marauders AND Marines out of it. I feel like in pretty much any situation where I would want a reactor, building a 2nd barracks is now just easier.
|
On March 27 2010 04:42 LUE.Leoj wrote:
I'm trying to figure out why Barracks should ever have Reactors now. It's slightly more expensive but a Rax+Lab is just as easy/quick to build and you can make Marauders AND Marines out of it. I feel like in pretty much any situation where I would want a reactor, building a 2nd barracks is now just easier.
You can later use the reactor for a factory or starport.
|
On March 27 2010 04:09 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 03:53 adelarge wrote:On March 27 2010 03:47 SLush wrote:On March 27 2010 02:52 Tropics wrote:On March 27 2010 01:11 SLush wrote:On March 27 2010 01:07 choboPEon wrote:On March 27 2010 01:03 SLush wrote:On March 26 2010 16:16 zee wrote:
wait... they buffed banelings? :I like they werent imba enough! They weren't. it just increases the damage vs armored so maybe a little bit more viable vs protoss, cuz they were useless for they cost. Makes it pretty viable to break a Terran wall and then get right at a bio ball. In fact, I've seen this in every single TvZ I've played today in Platinum :O That's because you dont know how to defend urself. Don't blame on imbalance if you dont know how to play yet. If you were new to Broodwar you would call a lot of imbalance. But people says the game is perfectly balanced right? yeah its definitely him just being bad dimaga didnt roll over every terran barring demuslim (who did a build exclusively to hard counter it, that would put him behind if he didnt know it was coming) in the last zotac cup using this build, definitely not Just wall with 2 buildings (no supply depot). You have to think outside of the box here AKA not like SC1. Funny how Blizzard themselves advocate for walling with supply depots by the submerging mechanics. Oh well, it could have worked if they also didn't make them paperthin at the same time. Funny how you can make exactly the same argument with raxes and factories being able to fly!!
Erm no, you can't. Flying building are the same like in BW. On the other hand, supply depots were changed, which was the point of this argument.
|
Barracks should really have never had reactors in the first place. It's simpler just to build another rax.
|
On March 27 2010 03:09 Zeke50100 wrote:
It's Blizzard's "subtle" way of making a push towards mech, not to mention that Vikings cost less gas now. Viking on the ground is basically a mech unit that is better than the Stalker in many, many ways.
Vikings on the ground aren't more powerful than stalkers, and they have a higher cost and lower mobility, so no, they aren't better than stalkers in many many ways, they are better in one specific thing - destroying air, which is their main purpose(and the best unit in the game for that purpose) and the ground form is mostly to use up what you have left over, if the opponent stops making air or to harass undefended expos and such.
|
On March 27 2010 05:02 adelarge wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 04:09 Klockan3 wrote:On March 27 2010 03:53 adelarge wrote:On March 27 2010 03:47 SLush wrote:On March 27 2010 02:52 Tropics wrote:On March 27 2010 01:11 SLush wrote:On March 27 2010 01:07 choboPEon wrote:On March 27 2010 01:03 SLush wrote:On March 26 2010 16:16 zee wrote:
wait... they buffed banelings? :I like they werent imba enough! They weren't. it just increases the damage vs armored so maybe a little bit more viable vs protoss, cuz they were useless for they cost. Makes it pretty viable to break a Terran wall and then get right at a bio ball. In fact, I've seen this in every single TvZ I've played today in Platinum :O That's because you dont know how to defend urself. Don't blame on imbalance if you dont know how to play yet. If you were new to Broodwar you would call a lot of imbalance. But people says the game is perfectly balanced right? yeah its definitely him just being bad dimaga didnt roll over every terran barring demuslim (who did a build exclusively to hard counter it, that would put him behind if he didnt know it was coming) in the last zotac cup using this build, definitely not Just wall with 2 buildings (no supply depot). You have to think outside of the box here AKA not like SC1. Funny how Blizzard themselves advocate for walling with supply depots by the submerging mechanics. Oh well, it could have worked if they also didn't make them paperthin at the same time. Funny how you can make exactly the same argument with raxes and factories being able to fly!! Erm no, you can't. Flying building are the same like in BW. On the other hand, supply depots were changed, which was the point of this argument.
Supply depots was changed to make them like other structures, not to make them more viable as walls than other structures. All that it changed was to allow for supply only walls.
|
On March 27 2010 05:18 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 05:02 adelarge wrote:On March 27 2010 04:09 Klockan3 wrote:On March 27 2010 03:53 adelarge wrote:On March 27 2010 03:47 SLush wrote:On March 27 2010 02:52 Tropics wrote:On March 27 2010 01:11 SLush wrote:On March 27 2010 01:07 choboPEon wrote:On March 27 2010 01:03 SLush wrote:On March 26 2010 16:16 zee wrote:
wait... they buffed banelings? :I like they werent imba enough! They weren't. it just increases the damage vs armored so maybe a little bit more viable vs protoss, cuz they were useless for they cost. Makes it pretty viable to break a Terran wall and then get right at a bio ball. In fact, I've seen this in every single TvZ I've played today in Platinum :O That's because you dont know how to defend urself. Don't blame on imbalance if you dont know how to play yet. If you were new to Broodwar you would call a lot of imbalance. But people says the game is perfectly balanced right? yeah its definitely him just being bad dimaga didnt roll over every terran barring demuslim (who did a build exclusively to hard counter it, that would put him behind if he didnt know it was coming) in the last zotac cup using this build, definitely not Just wall with 2 buildings (no supply depot). You have to think outside of the box here AKA not like SC1. Funny how Blizzard themselves advocate for walling with supply depots by the submerging mechanics. Oh well, it could have worked if they also didn't make them paperthin at the same time. Funny how you can make exactly the same argument with raxes and factories being able to fly!! Erm no, you can't. Flying building are the same like in BW. On the other hand, supply depots were changed, which was the point of this argument. Supply depots was changed to make them like other structures, not to make them more viable as walls than other structures. All that it changed was to allow for supply only walls.
I still don't know if you understand what I meant...
SLush wrote, that you shouldn't use supply depots for walls, that it's a bad habit from SC1. And yet, Blizzard made some changes which in fact encourages using supply depots as walls in SC2. If you remember terran revelation video, there were specifically a wall made only from supply depots and Browder was like "Look, now you can submerge them and move freely outside".
|
On March 27 2010 03:47 Slayer91 wrote:
I think people are really overreacting about this baneling buff. I mean, they're good vs rines becaues they splash and rines have low hp. That won't change at all. Marauders are bigger and have more hp so they spread out splash and also take less damage.
Pre change:
15-1 = 14 damage vs a marauder
= 9 banelings to kill a 125 hp 1 armour marauder. (A bit more efficient when bunched but big marauder frames really means you won't splash that much.
250 mins 225 gas. MORE THAN A COLOSSUS in gas and only 75 less minerals to take down one marauder. (Because of the way splash works you would need more to take down like 3 marauders as well)
Post change:
20-1 = 19 damage vs a marauder.
=7 banelings to kill a 1 armour marauder
=175 mins 175 gas. MAYBE efficient in terms of minerals but never in terms of gas.
So you still REALLY need to micro them against marauder/marine because you can blow enough banelings to kill all his marines and kill only a couple marauders.
Result: Banelings are still worthless except really for marine hard counter, and maybe zealot/templar counter as well, and also baneling bombs on workers might be deadly. Still ridiculously inefficient vs anything not light, no real change. No doubt, they are still amazingly effective vs marines and I really hate this emphasis on mass marauder, it's already popular and got buffed. I was always a marine fan. Really weak vs splash but more firepower.
Other changes:
Double hellion harass openings nerfed a lot, my version used 5 rines to harass early which is not viable at all with slowed rine production/reactor production.
Slower rine/reactor production also means more minerals for teching. They probably want to encourage that.
Terrans given a lot more gas to encourage raven/ghost usage,
More minerals used with your vikings/ghosts means smaller core unit groups.
ZvZ:
Roach burrow now largely going to be unused. I never saw any real abuse of burrow micro so I always felt burrow being too weak not too strong, since you also lose the units firepower when you burrow it.
Banlings cost 50 minerals. 25 for the zergling and 25 morph cost, so your mineral costs are a lot lower than the actual ones.
A burrowed roach regenerated more hp than it could deal in damage, so losing their firepower was compensated. They regenerated 10 hp a second and dealt 16 damage every 2 seconds, they also have 2 armor, so the regen is even more helpful.
|
|
|
On March 27 2010 05:13 lololol wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 03:09 Zeke50100 wrote:
It's Blizzard's "subtle" way of making a push towards mech, not to mention that Vikings cost less gas now. Viking on the ground is basically a mech unit that is better than the Stalker in many, many ways. Vikings on the ground aren't more powerful than stalkers, and they have a higher cost and lower mobility, so no, they aren't better than stalkers in many many ways, they are better in one specific thing - destroying air, which is their main purpose(and the best unit in the game for that purpose) and the ground form is mostly to use up what you have left over, if the opponent stops making air or to harass undefended expos and such.
Vikings have a ground cooldown of 1, and a base attack of 14. Stalkers have a cooldown of 1.44, and a base attack of 10 (+4 vs Armored). Vikings also equal the Stalker's range. The only thing a Stalker beats it at is movement speed, with 2.9531 compared to 2.25.
Mobility isn't too big of a deal because it can transform into air, which is much more mobile than the Stalker, even with Blink (albeit requiring more micro and APM).
They out-price the Stalker by 25 Minerals and 25 Gas, which I can grant you; however, that is a small price to get the top anti-air unit, along with a decent ground unit.
It can soft-counter Banshees and Brood Lords (pretty well ) by being un-hittable, while the Stalker cannot. The Corruptor does not have enough range to be a successful counter, as well as Phoenixes (however, the Phoenix's speed can make up for it; a Viking can still transform into ground and be unhittable temporarily, and transform back to pseudo-hit and run). Both Roaches and Marauders can be beaten by a Viking much more efficiently by a Stalker, and even pseudo-hit and run via Transform micro.
Both suck against Immortals, although the Viking can just fly away, while the Stalker can be trapped by ground units/terrain. Stalkers are evenly matched against Stalkers, while the Viking's superior attack speed will overpower a Stalker. Zealots are...melee And so are Archons, Zerglings, etc.
Only Hydralisks, Marines, Stalker, and Sentry cannot be pseudo-hit and run by the Viking as ground units. However, a Hydralisk matches the Viking in movement speed, while having less range un-upgraded. Same can be said for Marines and Sentries, although their range cannot be upgraded (although Marines have stim).
Note that Vikings will kill things 44% quicker than Stalkers against Armored, and 101.6% quicker than Stalkers against Light, due to both base attack (compared to bonus) and attack speed.
Enough to support that Vikings are better than Stalkers, even as anti-ground?
|
I think im done with using terran. They are really bad now. I can't do shit vs zerg or protoss mid game / early
|
On March 27 2010 05:33 lololol wrote:
Banlings cost 50 minerals. 25 for the zergling and 25 morph cost, so your mineral costs are a lot lower than the actual ones.
A burrowed roach regenerated more hp than it could deal in damage, so losing their firepower was compensated. They regenerated 10 hp a second and dealt 16 damage every 2 seconds, they also have 2 armor, so the regen is even more helpful.
Thanks, edited.
|
am i the only one tl.net that seemed to not be able to play sc2 after this patch due to lag problems ??
|
Well in my non expert opinion, having now played with and against Terran a fair amount, they are god awful. The marine build time nerf really really hurts a lot, especially in tandem with the reactor change.
|
that is what i didn't understand...they cut marine production x2. Increase time it takes to build...and increase time it takes for the reactor for finish building...makes it harder to defend proxy and strong early game attacks.
|
I'm guessing they figured Marines weren't meant to be massed, much like how it is currently. Nerfs to Roaches (and Zealots in a previous patch) may have been used to stop this "Click production building, click A/R/Z, repeat" nonsense.
|
Toss is weak. And it's getting worse after every patch. ((
Blizzard pls fix those imba marauders.
|
anyone else having a great time raping terran before they can even build a rax? send like 3 probes as you build your pylon and bam he cant build or he pulls half his scvs while probes can just pick one off and run while they regain shield.
|
On March 27 2010 05:37 Zeke50100 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 05:13 lololol wrote:On March 27 2010 03:09 Zeke50100 wrote:
It's Blizzard's "subtle" way of making a push towards mech, not to mention that Vikings cost less gas now. Viking on the ground is basically a mech unit that is better than the Stalker in many, many ways. Vikings on the ground aren't more powerful than stalkers, and they have a higher cost and lower mobility, so no, they aren't better than stalkers in many many ways, they are better in one specific thing - destroying air, which is their main purpose(and the best unit in the game for that purpose) and the ground form is mostly to use up what you have left over, if the opponent stops making air or to harass undefended expos and such. Vikings have a ground cooldown of 1, and a base attack of 14. Stalkers have a cooldown of 1.44, and a base attack of 10 (+4 vs Armored). Vikings also equal the Stalker's range. The only thing a Stalker beats it at is movement speed, with 2.9531 compared to 2.25. Mobility isn't too big of a deal because it can transform into air, which is much more mobile than the Stalker, even with Blink (albeit requiring more micro and APM). They out-price the Stalker by 25 Minerals and 25 Gas, which I can grant you; however, that is a small price to get the top anti-air unit, along with a decent ground unit. It can soft-counter Banshees and Brood Lords (pretty well ) by being un-hittable, while the Stalker cannot. The Corruptor does not have enough range to be a successful counter, as well as Phoenixes (however, the Phoenix's speed can make up for it; a Viking can still transform into ground and be unhittable temporarily, and transform back to pseudo-hit and run). Both Roaches and Marauders can be beaten by a Viking much more efficiently by a Stalker, and even pseudo-hit and run via Transform micro. Both suck against Immortals, although the Viking can just fly away, while the Stalker can be trapped by ground units/terrain. Stalkers are evenly matched against Stalkers, while the Viking's superior attack speed will overpower a Stalker. Zealots are...melee And so are Archons, Zerglings, etc. Only Hydralisks, Marines, Stalker, and Sentry cannot be pseudo-hit and run by the Viking as ground units. Enough to support that Vikings are better than Stalkers, even as anti-ground?
Comparing just DPS when they have a lot lower durability and higher cost doesn't prove anything.
Vikings suck vs marauders just as much as stalkers do, there's no such thing as vikings beating marauders efficiently. The transform kiting is also pretty useless, since people usually mix units.
Vikings beat stalkers slightly in 1v1, but not enough to compensate for the 50% higher gas cost. For example: in a 4v5(600/300 vs 625/250) battle, the stalkers win with 2 of them surviving, which is a very good advantage, especially since...
You're comparing vikings to a unit many players considered useless and the weakest unit in the game and the patch did nothing to buff their effectivness vs Vikings.
|
|
|
DTs were not nerfed that hard. (their intended use isn't to go up against large armies that can detect them. Hellions are better vs them now... OH NOES)
DT Rushing was nerfed.
Expoing off of fast DT Tech was nerfed (and wasn't viable to begin with).
honestly, why all the griping?
|
United States4991 Posts
On March 27 2010 06:33 Mora wrote:
DTs were not nerfed that hard. (their intended use isn't go up against large armies that can detect them. Hellions are better vs them now... OH NOES)
DT Rushing was nerfed.
Expoing off of fast DT Tech was nerfed (and wasn't viable to begin with).
honestly, why all the griping?
Why are you being so defensive about DTs and their building being nerfed?
It's not a huge nerf to DTs perhaps, but they were already not very good it seemed, so people are justifiably wondering why they were nerfed.
No, it probably won't make a big difference for Protoss, but I don't see why you are so mad about everyone complaining about it.
|
@zeke about Stalkers v Vikings:
Stalkers have 35 more total hp (80 shields + 80hp; and those shields regen so you can really use Stalker's speed to their adv) and 1 armor. Factor in the added cost of the Viking, their utility beyond fighting Stalkers (they're not exactly throw-away units), Warp Gate reinforcement of Stalkers (and therefore the build time effect of that along with Chrono Boost even considering Reactor Starports), and that if Vikings are to retreat they are going to take damage while lifting off because it's not exactly instant (nor is it particularly instant to land and they are painfully slow on the ground relatively)...
Basically, if you're trading Stalkers with Vikings, man you are having a good day xD
More-likely though the Terran player is going to use his Vikings on Kulas Ravine or etc to take advantage of high-ground harass (personally, I'm not going to shove Vikings into a proper ground mix-up unless the game is on the line and suddenly risking the livelihood of my Vikings becomes perfectly fine; otherwise they're just too valuable imo for air superiority and just for the threat of harassing undefended mineral lines).
|
On March 27 2010 06:36 Insane wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 06:33 Mora wrote:
DTs were not nerfed that hard. (their intended use isn't to go up against large armies that can detect them. Hellions are better vs them now... OH NOES)
DT Rushing was nerfed.
Expoing off of fast DT Tech was nerfed (and wasn't viable to begin with).
honestly, why all the griping? Why are you being so defensive about DTs and their building being nerfed? It's not a huge nerf to DTs perhaps, but they were already not very good it seemed, so people are justifiably wondering why they were nerfed. No, it probably won't make a big difference for Protoss, but I don't see why you are so mad about everyone complaining about it.
It's just context.
Complaints about banelings i understand; marines, core reactors - sure; scv's - yep. I think it's a little soon to be going up in arms about these things, but i can understand where people are coming from.
Hell, i'd even be ok with people complaining that DTs didn't get a buff.
But a nerf that's obviously aimed at DT rushing that has no effect on the caliber of players like the ones on this forum, i'm not patient with. This is the forum blizzard should go to for decent feedback, and the shit that's spewing from this thread should make them inclined to never come back.
I probably shouldn't get as annoyed as i do, but i guess i can't help it. I've toted around (like an idiot) to a whole bunch of people about how great the SC community is because they're reasonable and thought-out (if also elitist). It's been a desperate and secret hope that the community might bleed into Relic's communities to provide a little stability and sanity. It appears that my glasses were rose-tinted.
The SC(2) community is just as repulsive as the rest of gaming communities.
Don't worry, if i'm asked again if Blizzard should peruse these forums, my stance will have changed.
|
the reactor nerf is actually really huge (it takes really superlong)
|
On March 27 2010 07:04 PredY wrote:
the reactor nerf is actually really huge (it takes really superlong)
They buffed it in patch 2 to the reduced time, this patch they set it back to patch 1 build time. Terran can adapt to it. If you need a starport to have a reactor use your factory to build it while you build the starport.
|
On March 27 2010 07:06 Kralic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 07:04 PredY wrote:
the reactor nerf is actually really huge (it takes really superlong) They buffed it in patch 2 to the reduced time, this patch they set it back to patch 1 build time. Terran can adapt to it. If you need a starport to have a reactor use your factory to build it while you build the starport.
Just need to use your rax in the begging to get your rectors fast for factory or starport, it probably ways set back due to alot of terran still able to basically do a +1 mnm timing pushes to win.
|
Reactors are pretty much useless now early game, though. For a little more minerals, no gas, and a 10-second longer build time, I basically get the functionality of a Reactor while still being allowed to build Marines from that barracks, simply by building another one instead.
Late game I guess, maybe, but you'd still rather be building 2 Marines and a Rax in 50 seconds (Rax in 60) as opposed to one Reactor and no Marines.
If I had the patience I'd learn how to macro as Zerg but I've pretty much already given up on that as a lost cause.
|
On March 27 2010 06:33 Mora wrote:
DTs were not nerfed that hard. (their intended use isn't to go up against large armies that can detect them. Hellions are better vs them now... OH NOES) Isn't their intended use to harass?
And obviously the later you get them and the more they cost, the less effective they will be. It's a one trick pony as well, so if you get them even later most likely the enemy will have sufficient detection.
Considering you need Dark Shrine just in order to get them (which has no further use), it's just a gimmick currently. I'd say this patch pretty much turn them useless (if they werent already), which is sad since it's pretty much the only Protoss tech choice the other races actually have to be wary about.
|
United States4991 Posts
On March 27 2010 06:56 Mora wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 06:36 Insane wrote:On March 27 2010 06:33 Mora wrote:
DTs were not nerfed that hard. (their intended use isn't to go up against large armies that can detect them. Hellions are better vs them now... OH NOES)
DT Rushing was nerfed.
Expoing off of fast DT Tech was nerfed (and wasn't viable to begin with).
honestly, why all the griping? Why are you being so defensive about DTs and their building being nerfed? It's not a huge nerf to DTs perhaps, but they were already not very good it seemed, so people are justifiably wondering why they were nerfed. No, it probably won't make a big difference for Protoss, but I don't see why you are so mad about everyone complaining about it. It's just context. Complaints about banelings i understand; marines, core reactors - sure; scv's - yep. I think it's a little soon to be going up in arms about these things, but i can understand where people are coming from. Hell, i'd even be ok with people complaining that DTs didn't get a buff. But a nerf that's obviously aimed at DT rushing that has no effect on the caliber of players like the ones on this forum, i'm not patient with. This is the forum blizzard should go to for decent feedback, and the shit that's spewing from this thread should make them inclined to never come back. I probably shouldn't get as annoyed as i do, but i guess i can't help it. I've toted around (like an idiot) to a whole bunch of people about how great the SC community is because they're reasonable and thought-out (if also elitist). It's been a desperate and secret hope that the community might bleed into Relic's communities to provide a little stability and sanity. It appears that my glasses were rose-tinted. The SC(2) community is just as repulsive as the rest of gaming communities. Don't worry, if i'm asked again if Blizzard should peruse these forums, my stance will have changed.
There are plenty of currently high level players who post here and there is plenty of good analysis of the patch, too. If you seriously thought everyone in the SC community was a great poster, then your glasses were indeed tinted. If you compare the average quality of posts here to the posts on Bnet forums, then I think we're doing a lot better overall.
Gaming communities seem to produce a high quantity of noise-signal ratio in general, but if you pay attention to certain players then there's definitely a lot of valuable feedback posted here.
It's not an easy task to get rid of all the 'lower-quality' posters, because a lot of them are players who are not great at the game, but are genuinely trying to give productive feedback about it. Banning them engenders a lot of ill-will, and despite the site perhaps being known as elitist compared to many, it's not really my personal wish that TL is known as "that site with a bunch of elitist assholes".
Also keep in mind, a good portion of the good posters today were not that way at one point
Also people use a lot of hyperbole to prove points, like saying "X is totally useless and should never ever be gotten" when in actuality a lot of time what they're saying is "X should be buffed".
The former statement may not be true, but the latter may very well be true.
|
On March 27 2010 07:38 Paladia wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 06:33 Mora wrote:
DTs were not nerfed that hard. (their intended use isn't to go up against large armies that can detect them. Hellions are better vs them now... OH NOES) Isn't their intended use to harass? And obviously the later you get them and the more they cost, the less effective they will be. It's a one trick pony as well, so if you get them even later most likely the enemy will have sufficient detection. Considering you need Dark Shrine just in order to get them (which has no further use), it's just a gimmick currently. I'd say this patch pretty much turn them useless (if they werent already), which is sad since it's pretty much the only Protoss tech choice the other races actually have to be wary about.
I don't believe that is their only intended role. I think one of the intentions of their design is to have just 1-3 in a large force. If your enemy does not have detection it will severely punish them. It forces Terran to use scans, zerg to upgrade to and put overseers in jeopardy and Protoss to keep an observer in each attack force (and considering their speed this slows your enemys movement across the map positionally if they fear being without their observer).
Yes the DT can harass, but it can cause just as much economic and single battle damage/fear by being included in low quantities in your unit-mix. And this feature of their use does not need to be available early game.
|
I have a question, if Dustin Browder doesn't know what he's doing, would that still be ok? Like would SC2 not turn out like CnC and be more like SC?
|
On March 27 2010 06:33 Mora wrote:
DTs were not nerfed that hard. (their intended use isn't to go up against large armies that can detect them. Hellions are better vs them now... OH NOES)
DT Rushing was nerfed.
Expoing off of fast DT Tech was nerfed (and wasn't viable to begin with).
honestly, why all the griping?
Ok, so give me one good reason to nerf DT rush.
I can only see this being used in noob copper games tbh. Making them light doesn't help at all, but it's not why I complain.
You say it yourself: Rushing DTs is NOT viable in the current metagame - so why the hell should they nerf it?
|
On March 26 2010 11:26 Blacklizard wrote:
Seems clear this patch is designed to test early to mid TvP among a few other things. Very interesting.
It's not that they are afraid dark temps are suddenly becoming more powerful vs. terran, the race with the built-in always going to get scan option and cheapest tower/turret option. I mean in BW and SC2 Z and P always had to put up with Dark Templar threats and never had an uhoh button in a scan or a worker that yelled help in SC/BW b/c- it didn't one shot die. It is that they want to test certain things and want to take dark templars out of the picture for this patch.
I have a feeling, without Dark Templar as a quick (OK, not quick... zero) threat, they are looking if Protoss can manage vs Terran if they go non-robo tech. Or at least less dependent on robo. Then again immortals are still juicy... so I dunno. But the obvious dynamics that are changed/things they are testing:
a. Protoss don't have to worry about SCV/Marine rushes, but do have to worry about bunkers and/or marauders. This patch is testing zealot strength vs certain Terran builds and Marauder strength against all Protoss builds.
b. Protoss harass has a chance of killing workers who aren't 60 HP tanks. Colossi can still one shot drones/probes, but SCVs still take 2 shots, so it's not that. Blink harrass? Ummm... I can't see it happening but OK maybe in some insane build on the perfect map. Zealot/HT drop? Yeah, probably. Or just general drops with warp-ins.
c. Colossus can't one shot marines. So you may expect more High Templar play. They want to test if Protoss can genuinely advance to mid and/or late game by going mostly all gateway tech. The observer nerf (which is horrible IMO, Protoss always have the worst time scouting early and mid game) also decreases the urge to go Robo tech.
d. Just how strong Marauders are in general.
e. If Protoss can hang vs. Mutas with the new stalker. That's why no Phoenix buff. Yet.
f. If Zerg will use banelings more in general.
g. How good ghosts should be.
h. Terran mech builds.
Oh, and I called that SCV 45 HP change over a decade ago. More to the point I've been playing a ton of Terran lately in SC2, and I think that the drop is absolutely fine... even expected. The only thing bad that could come of the SCV nerf is if they really do die too easily while creating buildings. If so the fix should be that they aren't targetable when building, *except* when building bunkers, to avoid overpowered bunker rushes. Or hell take half damage while building non-bunkers... with the new fancy engine that should be easy. Although their repair speed has been nerfed so hugely from SC/BW, I'm not horribly worried about a bunker rush being overpowered at a glance. Except we still have salvage as Terran. -evil grin-
This is still one of the more thought out posts in this thread.
It's a beta, people like to overreact. How many who've posted in this thread even have access to Beta?
|
Maybe because DT aren´t just a "rush only" unit? They are still invaluable flanking units and Detection way too often reactive. Zerg are apparently unwilling to get overseers preemtivly and Terrans only scan when they KNOW where the DTs are. Instead of assaulting the Peons which works once and then never again why not "save" your DTs to assassinate Ghosts or Infestors?
|
this patch was horrible
i expect them to release a new patch really quickly after seeing the stats go z100% tp 0% winratio
id be z user right now if zvz wasnt so broken and tvt not so brilliant
|
On March 27 2010 02:52 Tropics wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 01:11 SLush wrote:On March 27 2010 01:07 choboPEon wrote:On March 27 2010 01:03 SLush wrote:On March 26 2010 16:16 zee wrote:
wait... they buffed banelings? :I like they werent imba enough! They weren't. it just increases the damage vs armored so maybe a little bit more viable vs protoss, cuz they were useless for they cost. Makes it pretty viable to break a Terran wall and then get right at a bio ball. In fact, I've seen this in every single TvZ I've played today in Platinum :O That's because you dont know how to defend urself. Don't blame on imbalance if you dont know how to play yet. If you were new to Broodwar you would call a lot of imbalance. But people says the game is perfectly balanced right? yeah its definitely him just being bad dimaga didnt roll over every terran barring demuslim (who did a build exclusively to hard counter it, that would put him behind if he didnt know it was coming) in the last zotac cup using this build, definitely not
how would Demuslim's build put him behind?
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
Guh so much useless bullshit in this thread.
|
On March 27 2010 07:53 obesechicken13 wrote:
I have a question, if Dustin Browder doesn't know what he's doing, would that still be ok? Like would SC2 not turn out like CnC and be more like SC?
I dont believe he's the main balance designer, that would be David Kim.
|
On March 27 2010 07:39 Insane wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 06:56 Mora wrote:On March 27 2010 06:36 Insane wrote:On March 27 2010 06:33 Mora wrote:
DTs were not nerfed that hard. (their intended use isn't to go up against large armies that can detect them. Hellions are better vs them now... OH NOES)
DT Rushing was nerfed.
Expoing off of fast DT Tech was nerfed (and wasn't viable to begin with).
honestly, why all the griping? Why are you being so defensive about DTs and their building being nerfed? It's not a huge nerf to DTs perhaps, but they were already not very good it seemed, so people are justifiably wondering why they were nerfed. No, it probably won't make a big difference for Protoss, but I don't see why you are so mad about everyone complaining about it. It's just context. Complaints about banelings i understand; marines, core reactors - sure; scv's - yep. I think it's a little soon to be going up in arms about these things, but i can understand where people are coming from. Hell, i'd even be ok with people complaining that DTs didn't get a buff. But a nerf that's obviously aimed at DT rushing that has no effect on the caliber of players like the ones on this forum, i'm not patient with. This is the forum blizzard should go to for decent feedback, and the shit that's spewing from this thread should make them inclined to never come back. I probably shouldn't get as annoyed as i do, but i guess i can't help it. I've toted around (like an idiot) to a whole bunch of people about how great the SC community is because they're reasonable and thought-out (if also elitist). It's been a desperate and secret hope that the community might bleed into Relic's communities to provide a little stability and sanity. It appears that my glasses were rose-tinted. The SC(2) community is just as repulsive as the rest of gaming communities. Don't worry, if i'm asked again if Blizzard should peruse these forums, my stance will have changed. There are plenty of currently high level players who post here and there is plenty of good analysis of the patch, too. If you seriously thought everyone in the SC community was a great poster, then your glasses were indeed tinted. If you compare the average quality of posts here to the posts on Bnet forums, then I think we're doing a lot better overall. Gaming communities seem to produce a high quantity of noise-signal ratio in general, but if you pay attention to certain players then there's definitely a lot of valuable feedback posted here. It's not an easy task to get rid of all the 'lower-quality' posters, because a lot of them are players who are not great at the game, but are genuinely trying to give productive feedback about it. Banning them engenders a lot of ill-will, and despite the site perhaps being known as elitist compared to many, it's not really my personal wish that TL is known as "that site with a bunch of elitist assholes". Also keep in mind, a good portion of the good posters today were not that way at one point Also people use a lot of hyperbole to prove points, like saying "X is totally useless and should never ever be gotten" when in actuality a lot of time what they're saying is "X should be buffed". The former statement may not be true, but the latter may very well be true.
How long does it take to read 29 pages of feedback? How many people are going to want to read it with their own eyes to limit inherent mis-interpretation?
Let's say 10 devs want to read such a thread. $20/hour per dev (rough average estimate), and 2 hours to read 29 pages (under-estimate, to be honest). there are, 10? key forums to sift through.
We just spent $4000. (and pushed back the work that those devs would otherwise be doing).
The more time goes on, the more i think like a producer. As a developer, i wish there was somewhere i could go where i wouldn't have to sift through 29 pages of knee-jerk reactions for the few posters who (might) have some insight into your game.
I would recommend having an experts forum where you would [perhaps] let everyone read the thread, but only allow certain posters access to post. The thought of having a place where posters like Naz, FA, Smuft, Eri etc. would debate their thoughts for my eyes to see without 29 pages of shit to find it makes me want to cream myself.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
|
Experts forum as ready-only with educated and interesting discussion. I would love it..
Or simply just an article with collected opinions of good players? Makes more sense.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
Yeah gonna make this happen in the next few days. Mora, such a visionary (and a hater).
|
Of course, I'd love to have the job of reading TL for $20 an hour :D
I agree with the Experts forums; I've seen other forums (pretty big ones, not tiny fan-forums) do similar things with restricted access. All members can read it, but only a select few can actually post. Shooting a PM with your thoughts (and valid reasoning) can get your thought "forwarded" to the topic, or give you access (either temporary or permanent) to the area.
Anyway, with the decreased Gas cost for both the Ghost and Viking (which outweigh the increased gas cost of the Tech Lab), will gas-intensive units like the Siege Tank be produced more often? Many times, I see the "it costs too much gas" complaint to justify the neglect of what I think is a pretty awesome unit (in a different way than it was in SC1).
There's still the 3 Supply rather than the 2, but there's always Supply Drop (which isn't terribad) and the fact that the Immortal (a powerful anti-armor unit, along with a decent anti-light attack, similar to the tank) costs 4 Supply, comes from a very commonly used building, and yet doesn't receive as many tanks.
|
I liked the cost changes for Viking and Ghost....but dude..
The Terran nerfs is just horrible..
|
question
o Roach
+ Burrowed regeneration rate decreased from 10 to 5.
+ Upgraded burrowed regeneration bonus decreased from +20 to +10.
I don't quite understand. If you have the regen upgrade and you burrow, how fast do you regen? is it 20?
|
I guess that means no more marine rushes, it really did not need to be debuffed that much.
|
Sigh... another proxy death. Is this thing even possible to stop now?
|
On March 27 2010 10:39 Mora wrote:
I would recommend having an experts forum where you would [perhaps] let everyone read the thread, but only allow certain posters access to post. The thought of having a place where posters like Naz, FA, Smuft, Eri etc. would debate their thoughts for my eyes to see without 29 pages of shit to find it makes me want to cream myself.
Holy god this is a great idea. Kennegit, glad to hear this is going to get implemented.
|
Dominican Republic825 Posts
On March 27 2010 09:16 MorroW wrote:
this patch was horrible
i expect them to release a new patch really quickly after seeing the stats go z100% tp 0% winratio
id be z user right now if zvz wasnt so broken and tvt not so brilliant
why change race and not making urs better?
|
This isn't as bad as the whining in this thread is making it seem. DTs are harder to get because they now 1-shot the newly nerfed SCVs. DTs/HTs are now given the light type to encourage anti-light units (hellion, reaper, etc) which up until now are used only against early game units or to worker harass. Bunkers were made better to encourage their use. Reactors were nerfed because they were the deal of a century before. Same with observers, which were disproportionately cheap detection and scouting compared to what the other races had to spend. Every change here makes perfect sense to me.
This isn't a simple matter of "X is too good, so we'll nerf it!". None of these changes sit on their own on an island--All these changes work in conjunction. Blizz isn't retarded, they're Jedi masters playing 3-layered chess several moves ahead of all of us. If we want to be amateur game designers and contemplate balance and the potential effects of changes, we need to think like designers rather than like gamers.
On March 27 2010 10:39 Mora wrote:
I would recommend having an experts forum where you would [perhaps] let everyone read the thread, but only allow certain posters access to post. The thought of having a place where posters like Naz, FA, Smuft, Eri etc. would debate their thoughts for my eyes to see without 29 pages of shit to find it makes me want to cream myself.
Please make this happen.
|
Is it just me, or does the 'view profile' button after the game is over, and you right click on the persons name, not work?
I thought it might be because they aren't in a specific ladder yet, and still doing qualification matches, but then I added them to friends, and looked at their profiles that way, and they are in ladders...
I can see the 'view profile' button, but it doesn't light up like the others, and I can't click it.
|
On March 27 2010 12:26 fams wrote:
Is it just me, or does the 'view profile' button after the game is over, and you right click on the persons name, not work?
I thought it might be because they aren't in a specific ladder yet, and still doing qualification matches, but then I added them to friends, and looked at their profiles that way, and they are in ladders...
I can see the 'view profile' button, but it doesn't light up like the others, and I can't click it.
yep, seems broken for me and im assuming everyone else as well.
|
I like the idea of an experts forum, but I think that non-experts should be able to post on it too, with restrictions, such as non-experts can post a thread but it doesn't show up until it is reviewed by an admin, so then, for example, if a lower level platinum player such as myself has an interesting idea or thought and makes a high-quality thread on it, then if admins approve it is posted and can be discussed by the experts. Only a select few threads would need to be approved, and since its only new threads, not posts, that are being approved it would take very little time to review a thread. Also, seeing a tl-member who isn't as well known post a high-quality thread which is actually discussed by experts would motivate tl-members to post high-quality threads. What do you think about this idea?
|
Expert forum, eh? Good idea but...
|
On March 27 2010 11:38 CharlieMurphy wrote:question Show nested quote +
o Roach
+ Burrowed regeneration rate decreased from 10 to 5.
+ Upgraded burrowed regeneration bonus decreased from +20 to +10.
I don't quite understand. If you have the regen upgrade and you burrow, how fast do you regen? is it 20?
5 + 10 = 15
|
What would the requirements be for such an expert forum? A lot of the best players (on NA server at least) are relatively unknown to the TL community, which mainly recognizes former top SC players and its own members, disregarding the large amount of pro players from other games, as well as random people, who are currently doing very well on the ladder. I would like to hear the comments of these people as well, some even more than people like smurft and those other guys that one poster mentioned.
TL being elitist is fine, but being simply "TL-ist" or "SC-ist" and discriminating not based on skill, but based on how long people have been with TL or based on what game you played before SC2 is unacceptable and will lead to a lowering in the quality of information available on the site.
Welcome new/unknown top players with open arms and value their insight and feedback. After all, the fact that they haven't been a part of your community for a long time doesn't stop them from kicking your ass at SC2 ^^.
|
why the toss nerfs? 100 gas for observers!!!???? nice stalker buff though. about freakin time.
|
On March 27 2010 14:35 LF9 wrote:
What would the requirements be for such an expert forum? A lot of the best players (on NA server at least) are relatively unknown to the TL community, which mainly recognizes former top SC players and its own members, disregarding the large amount of pro players from other games, as well as random people, who are currently doing very well on the ladder. I would like to hear the comments of these people as well, some even more than people like smurft and those other guys that one poster mentioned.
TL being elitist is fine, but being simply "TL-ist" or "SC-ist" and discriminating not based on skill, but based on how long people have been with TL or based on what game you played before SC2 is unacceptable and will lead to a lowering in the quality of information available on the site.
Welcome new/unknown top players with open arms and value their insight and feedback. After all, the fact that they haven't been a part of your community for a long time doesn't stop them from kicking your ass at SC2 ^^.
well not sure about the other subgroups but the only thing that would come of embracing the war3 players on the us server would be bringing back 30 second warpgates and buffing lings.
|
On March 27 2010 14:48 GeMicles wrote:
why the toss nerfs? 100 gas for observers!!!????
Of all the changes, this one makes some of the most sense. Observers are already by far the least expensive detection unit, and to top it off they're probably the best at doing their job since they're invisible.
Protoss players are just spoiled with the expectations that have carried over from SC1, but this is not SC1.
As an aside, a DotA patch a couple versions ago included huge nerfs to map control abilities and items. The result was that the map was more filled with fog of war and become a scary place again, and this rewarded the player who is better able to think on his feet and adapt to a dynamic environment (Which is arguably the "better" player). I'm predicting this will do something similar for Protoss players.
|
On March 27 2010 10:51 Kennigit wrote:
Yeah gonna make this happen in the next few days. Mora, such a visionary (and a hater).
It's a good idea, it really helped liquid poker when they split up the forums into low, medium and high stakes where it's moderated and if you aren't playing the stakes you can get a forum ban. Makes the discussion much more relevant.
|
On March 27 2010 14:54 IdrA wrote:
well not sure about the other subgroups but the only thing that would come of embracing the war3 players on the us server would be bringing back 30 second warpgates and buffing lings.
Oh, IdrA, don't be such a hypocrite you cheesey protoss you! =) (loved that KOTBH game 3 build btw)
|
On March 27 2010 10:39 Mora wrote:
How long does it take to read 29 pages of feedback? How many people are going to want to read it with their own eyes to limit inherent mis-interpretation?
Let's say 10 devs want to read such a thread. $20/hour per dev (rough average estimate), and 2 hours to read 29 pages (under-estimate, to be honest). there are, 10? key forums to sift through.
We just spent $4000. (and pushed back the work that those devs would otherwise be doing).
The more time goes on, the more i think like a producer. As a developer, i wish there was somewhere i could go where i wouldn't have to sift through 29 pages of knee-jerk reactions for the few posters who (might) have some insight into your game.
I would recommend having an experts forum where you would [perhaps] let everyone read the thread, but only allow certain posters access to post. The thought of having a place where posters like Naz, FA, Smuft, Eri etc. would debate their thoughts for my eyes to see without 29 pages of shit to find it makes me want to cream myself.
Why would they read a forum for their opinion when they can watch recordeds of all the high ranked players playing. What high rank players do is much more important than what high rank players say.
That's also why they go off their internal data more than what people post on various forums.
Doing something like Arenajunkies wouldn't be bad but you place too much importance to what people post on forums. Especially this site where post count seems to be many people's measure of how important you are and how important what you say is.
Insane is spot on everything he has said.
|
anyone have an issue where they cant choose the game type etc. after patch 6? Like all it says is I have 3v3 placements to do and 1v1 etc. isn't even showing up and I cant start a game. Really annoying.
|
Let's say 10 devs want to read such a thread. $20/hour per dev (rough average estimate), and 2 hours to read 29 pages (under-estimate, to be honest). there are, 10? key forums to sift through.
We just spent $4000. (and pushed back the work that those devs would otherwise be doing).
The more time goes on, the more i think like a producer. As a developer, i wish there was somewhere i could go where i wouldn't have to sift through 29 pages of knee-jerk reactions for the few posters who (might) have some insight into your game.
I would recommend having an experts forum where you would [perhaps] let everyone read the thread, but only allow certain posters access to post. The thought of having a place where posters like Naz, FA, Smuft, Eri etc. would debate their thoughts for my eyes to see without 29 pages of shit to find it makes me want to cream myself.
I can help a bit here, I'm pretty sure this is how blizzard does it. As you say, paying developers a LOT more than $20 an hour (standard commission rates for a designer are around 30-50 an hour for senior positions, which presumably almost all of blizzard's design team occupy) to browse feedback threads is a bit idiotic .So, blizzard have what they call 'community managers'- guys like naethra and co for WoW, presumably they have similar blues for starcraft. These guys are paid at probably a far lower rate, and pretty much only browse and work with the forums. Being dedicated experts, I would guess they collate and sift the data as well as moderating, forwarding on the condensed reports to the dev teams. I would not be surprised if blizzard has a few ghosts who pretty much trawl forums like this as well, perhaps it's the same people. so the devs get all the info they need, without putting up with the walls of blah blah blah that intersperse feedback.
Of course I could be totally wrong, but as a games designer in training and having managed projects myself, this is how I would do it, and there's evidence that it's how blizzard does it as well.
|
So im enjoying the stalker buff, trying to use them in all my match ups now and be aggressive with blink
so far they are turning out to be pretty fun
|
The view profile when i right click on opponents name at the end of the game seems to be greyed out.
this is even mroe fucking annoying than having to add them as friends. Is it just me or is the 'feature' not functional yet
|
Russian Federation481 Posts
On March 27 2010 17:57 Wretched wrote:
The view profile when i right click on opponents name at the end of the game seems to be greyed out.
this is even mroe fucking annoying than having to add them as friends. Is it just me or is the 'feature' not functional yet
It's not just you. Seems like it doesn't work for everyone.
|
On March 27 2010 12:10 ComradeDover wrote:
DTs are harder to get because they now 1-shot the newly nerfed SCVs. DTs/HTs are now given the light type to encourage anti-light units (hellion, reaper, etc) which up until now are used only against early game units or to worker harass. So in order to encourage an even stronger counter to the unused DT, you make it even less used and more expensive? You make no sense, if anything more DT play should be encourage (as it's nearly extinct in the higher leagues).
And yes, DT used to one shot drones and probes and that was never a problem, by the time DTs were out everyone had detection. For Terrans its even less of a problem since they have detection within the few couple of minutes due to Orbital command.
|
On March 27 2010 10:55 Zeke50100 wrote:
(which outweigh the increased gas cost of the Tech Lab)
It went from 50 to 25, how is that an increase?
|
On March 27 2010 15:03 ComradeDover wrote:
As an aside, a DotA patch a couple versions ago included huge nerfs to map control abilities and items. The result was that the map was more filled with fog of war and become a scary place again, and this rewarded the player who is better able to think on his feet and adapt to a dynamic environment (Which is arguably the "better" player). I'm predicting this will do something similar for Protoss players.
It would just make protoss 25 min and 25 gas poorer.
|
On March 27 2010 19:58 lololol wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 10:55 Zeke50100 wrote:
(which outweigh the increased gas cost of the Tech Lab) It went from 50 to 25, how is that an increase?
Whoops, my bad, I read it wrong o.0
In that case, Terran is even more...less gas-intensive than I thought XD At least, compared to pre-patch. Thanks for pointing that out!
|
On March 27 2010 09:46 Kennigit wrote:
Guh so much useless bullshit in this thread.
It's probably get worse as more and more players start posting. How many admins manage the forum btw?
|
I agree with most of the stuff in this batch.
The reactor increased build time was good, I was winning too many games just going 2 rax, 1 with tech lab and 1 with reactor.
Roach regen debuff is good in addition to the increased baneling damage.
Stalkers needed to be buffed, thats good. DT nerf confuses me, now it's easier for me to crush protoss that rush for dts.
The one thing I hate about this patch:
The nerf to scvs
How could it possibly to fair that I need freaking 3 scv's to build a barracks?
I would be fine with reducing the attack speed, but reduced hp? So I can't wall, cause then I get harassed by the scouting probe, I can't make marines as fast?
They expect to be encouraging mech play by making it harder to wall?
|
hey guys, i was thinking about SCV getting 45 HP, I think it's a dumb thing, because terran has much less workers than any races : protoss gets so many probes with Chrono Boost, Zerg gets so many drones with spawn larvas ability. Ok, there is the Mule, but it is limited in time, even if a Mule represents 6 workers, it dies quite fast. Giving now 45 HP to SCV gives to terran players a much harder task to micro them in case of run-by or something.. Some SCV dies, and the terran is far behind, because he has less workers, assuming the terran use everytime his CC's mana for Mule/Scan, he's not able to recover his delay.... what do you think about it?
|
^ when you bring something like a hellions for a run-by kind of doubt 10, 45 or 60hp makes a difference.
|
I see a lot of changes here, but still nothing to change the currently boring and repetitive strategies that are seen in SC2. T1/1.5 as much as you can as fast as you can, 15 minutes is a long game - sorry but this is not StarCraft, or for that matter fun. You are forced to use a certain opening for each race and attempting to try any variations as such is not possible. Every game I win is a game won using a cookie-cutter opening that everyone conforms to. I tried today 5 games in a row to use a different opening, and promptly received losses for doing so. First game going cookie cutter after this, 6 minute win. I'm glad they are at least making sizable changes right now, but something needs to be done to make more than one opening truly viable.
Even when a race seems to have two openings available it really doesn't, if you are in ZvZ and try to go Zerglings to Mutalisk you will A. Have multiple hydras ready to great you, or B. your opponent will have so many roaches you can't possible stop his attack in time with 4-5 Mutalisk. The only way is to go the same boring Roach > Hydra > Infestor > Mutalisk build that is forced on ever Zerg player. You try to tech Hydras vs Roaches, Roaches still win.
The only long games I've ever seen are on Twilight Fortress and even at 25 minutes in, there is still usually one player massing 1.5 to the maximum amount possible. And guess what? It beats the T3 that the other team has.
|
On March 28 2010 03:49 OreoBoi wrote:
I agree with most of the stuff in this batch.
The reactor increased build time was good, I was winning too many games just going 2 rax, 1 with tech lab and 1 with reactor.
Were you playing against copper level opponents? It's really easy to hold that off. I'm glad you think reactor nerf is good, because not only does it take forever to build, but my marines come out WAY slower against zerg. So basically off 2 hatch he can make more units that I can pump out marines AND scvs off 4 rax. That's really fair.
|
Russian Federation85 Posts
There's one point which makes no sense for me. Why did they give High Templar and Dark Templar the armor light as additional but didn't add the armor light to the Ghost?
|
On March 27 2010 14:35 LF9 wrote:
What would the requirements be for such an expert forum? A lot of the best players (on NA server at least) are relatively unknown to the TL community, which mainly recognizes former top SC players and its own members, disregarding the large amount of pro players from other games, as well as random people, who are currently doing very well on the ladder. I would like to hear the comments of these people as well, some even more than people like smurft and those other guys that one poster mentioned.
TL being elitist is fine, but being simply "TL-ist" or "SC-ist" and discriminating not based on skill, but based on how long people have been with TL or based on what game you played before SC2 is unacceptable and will lead to a lowering in the quality of information available on the site.
Welcome new/unknown top players with open arms and value their insight and feedback. After all, the fact that they haven't been a part of your community for a long time doesn't stop them from kicking your ass at SC2 ^^.
If they truly are good players then their experience on what is powerful and what is not too useful ill be the same as one of these "sc1 players/TLers that are good at sc2", right?
And i've never heard before of for example TheLittleOne or CowGoMoo but they are good at sc2 so they are regarded here. If someone's good then he is known to be good, isn't he?
|
On March 28 2010 07:15 Dx Fx wrote:
There's one point which makes no sense for me. Why did they give High Templar and Dark Templar the armor light as additional but didn't add the armor light to the Ghost?
What would take advantage of it? Ghosts aren't particularly useful in TvT, Zerg don't have any attack bonuses vs. Light, and the only Protoss unit with a bonus vs. Light is the Phoenix. And while it might have been interesting to make Phoenixes more easily kill Ghosts, it's not like it's particularly difficult now for 4 Phoenixes to AG and assassinate a Ghost.
|
On March 28 2010 07:21 Kaniol wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 14:35 LF9 wrote:
What would the requirements be for such an expert forum? A lot of the best players (on NA server at least) are relatively unknown to the TL community, which mainly recognizes former top SC players and its own members, disregarding the large amount of pro players from other games, as well as random people, who are currently doing very well on the ladder. I would like to hear the comments of these people as well, some even more than people like smurft and those other guys that one poster mentioned.
TL being elitist is fine, but being simply "TL-ist" or "SC-ist" and discriminating not based on skill, but based on how long people have been with TL or based on what game you played before SC2 is unacceptable and will lead to a lowering in the quality of information available on the site.
Welcome new/unknown top players with open arms and value their insight and feedback. After all, the fact that they haven't been a part of your community for a long time doesn't stop them from kicking your ass at SC2 ^^. If they truly are good players then their experience on what is powerful and what is not too useful ill be the same as one of these "sc1 players/TLers that are good at sc2", right? And i've never heard before of for example TheLittleOne or CowGoMoo but they are good at sc2 so they are regarded here. If someone's good then he is known to be good, isn't he? Since CowGoMoo works at Blizzard it is quite expected that he will have some regards here.
|
go watch 3rd game from Team Liquid SC2 Invitational #1 between thelittleone and demuslim u will see how ridiculous are dt in pvt ...
|
On March 27 2010 16:38 Thereisnosaurus wrote:Show nested quote +Let's say 10 devs want to read such a thread. $20/hour per dev (rough average estimate), and 2 hours to read 29 pages (under-estimate, to be honest). there are, 10? key forums to sift through.
We just spent $4000. (and pushed back the work that those devs would otherwise be doing).
The more time goes on, the more i think like a producer. As a developer, i wish there was somewhere i could go where i wouldn't have to sift through 29 pages of knee-jerk reactions for the few posters who (might) have some insight into your game.
I would recommend having an experts forum where you would [perhaps] let everyone read the thread, but only allow certain posters access to post. The thought of having a place where posters like Naz, FA, Smuft, Eri etc. would debate their thoughts for my eyes to see without 29 pages of shit to find it makes me want to cream myself. I can help a bit here, I'm pretty sure this is how blizzard does it. As you say, paying developers a LOT more than $20 an hour (standard commission rates for a designer are around 30-50 an hour for senior positions, which presumably almost all of blizzard's design team occupy) to browse feedback threads is a bit idiotic .So, blizzard have what they call 'community managers'- guys like naethra and co for WoW, presumably they have similar blues for starcraft. These guys are paid at probably a far lower rate, and pretty much only browse and work with the forums. Being dedicated experts, I would guess they collate and sift the data as well as moderating, forwarding on the condensed reports to the dev teams. I would not be surprised if blizzard has a few ghosts who pretty much trawl forums like this as well, perhaps it's the same people. so the devs get all the info they need, without putting up with the walls of blah blah blah that intersperse feedback. Of course I could be totally wrong, but as a games designer in training and having managed projects myself, this is how I would do it, and there's evidence that it's how blizzard does it as well.
when you get a job at an RTS company designing the multiplayer and [presumably] it's not Blizzard, and even if you work 60 hours a week you still can't get done the 100 hours/week of work you'd like to do; you try gleaning balance feedback/arguements from your community manager.
They can tell you things like 'hey, everyone bitches about roaches', or 'when are you gonna fix EMP, it's overpowered, everyone says so!'. They can't tell you the reasons BEHIND why people say what the say because they don't understand why people say what they say.
When i see balance feedback on Company of Heroes or Starcraft, i can gernally discern "oh yes, that makes sense. or "oh yes, yes, of course, cause you're limited to options A, B, and C, in situation X, therefore unit Q needs an obvious nerf because of the timing window found in the 12:45-13:15 minute range". etc. etc. Community Managers can't understand those arguements because they're not hired to understand Strategy games. They're hired to interact with the community, do good PR, give consensus opinion, etc.
From what i know, Blizzard's community managers (at least a few of them) are decent players (more so than found at other companies), but they're certainly not going to be experts on RTS game design. They would be useful to point out certain threads or posts, to be like "hey, my.designer, read that thread, i think there might be some gems in it", but again, that's the best you can do.
Hell, i've been designing multiplayer games for 4 years, and when i read a good thread on balance, i can't even repeat the arguments there to my own balancers. It's not because i can't articulate myself or don't have good communication skills, but rather because every time words pass through someones interpretation, something is lost (or unfortunately added).
Blizzard devs need to interact and communicate with top players (they'll be shooting themselves in the foot if they don't. i hope they make the right decision in this). So let's give them a place for them do so. (and by communicate i don't necessarily mean direct interaction, but view the acute debates/interactions of top players).
|
you little guppies need not worry about the entry requirements to the experts forum.
teamliquid is good at these things and will be sure to invite anyone who is able to contribute.
honestly, teamliquid is a force to be reckoned with already, but i can't wait to see the power of TL in 10 years time.
Hell, i can envision TL becoming an externally hired balance/design critique for any game put on the market.
|
i really expected a lot better changes, what a disappointment
|
There were so many good things that blizzard did with this patch, I don't see why so many seem upset over it.
They weakened the ridiculous Terran cheeses that involved mass SCVs. This was probably the most crucial thing needed and they nailed it. Also, why did SCVs even need to have 60 hp instead of something closer to the other races? I think it was because in SC1 scvs were super vulnerable while constructing buildings, and it would be too easy to just pick off building SCVs. In SC2 it seems harder to pick them off while they are working anyway (could be wrong, it just looks that way)
They gave terran lategame a slight buff to help with the difficulties against protoss. these changes probably won't affect tvz that much since ghosts and mech units aren't quite as prevalent in that matchup.
So yeah, they probably didn't get it all right, but at least lets acknowledge that they did some good things with the patch as well.
|
Ban Mora plz, he just uses big words to make him self sound smart... He doesn't know what they actually mean.
|
@petered
People aren't upset about the things they fixed, but it's the way that they fixed those things.
For example, they could have changed the AI so it wouldn't auto-target workers, but instead they did the hp-nerf wich has implications on other parts of the game.
|
32 page threads suck. i read the first 2 pages and the last 2 ^^
|
tbh, i'd rather have them just put back the observatory and make obs 25/75 again. the nerf to obs price is kinda dumb. 50/100 is the same price as a sentry -.-
and i can kinda understand why DTs needed to be nerfed due to the corresponding SCV hp nerf, but now DTs are gonna go from underused to unused.
|
On March 26 2010 10:24 hifriend wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 10:22 BC.KoRn wrote:On March 26 2010 10:03 NET wrote:
Just an idea, maybe blizzard should also release a statement along side the patch notes in order for the starcraft community to have a better understanding of what is going through their heads. This will keep everyone from playing guessing games and auto complaining about everything.
On a side note, why kill DT's even more T_T... Very unlikely, that would only cause problems for Blizzard. Why would it cause problems? I thought it was a good suggestion actually.
Because if Blizzard tells you why they made a certain change or basically says why they do anything (game balance specifically) people on forums can use that against them in the future. If Blizzard goes back on something they said or thought people can be like "Oh hey but you said this before blah blah blah."
It all has to do with professionalism and having a good public image...they are not being paid to tell you what they think.
The game is for us to figure out on our own
|
On March 28 2010 14:33 FictionJV wrote:
@petered
People aren't upset about the things they fixed, but it's the way that they fixed those things.
For example, they could have changed the AI so it wouldn't auto-target workers, but instead they did the hp-nerf wich has implications on other parts of the game.
?
Your proposed modification wouldn't have changed anything. Zealots not auto-targetting SCVs would not enable them to magically jump over said SCVs to get to the marines. Right clicking on the marines with your Zealots would have the very same effect, yet that's not getting us very far now is it?
I'm pretty sure Blizzard knows that whatever change has drastic repercussions on the rest of the balance. Most people in this thread don't though, they only see things at face value and like to suggest proper "fixes" without really thinking it through, just like you
You can never please everyone.
|
Although most things in the patch make sense, I really, REALLY, don't get the baneling buff. Specialy with the increased reactor/rine time. Let's see how well this goes in TvZ.
|
On March 28 2010 14:25 BC.KoRn wrote:
Ban Mora plz, he just uses big words to make him self sound smart... He doesn't know what they actually mean.
I should think we should at least try the idea out. Mora is a dev for CoH btw.
On March 28 2010 14:35 CowGoMoo wrote:
32 page threads suck. i read the first 2 pages and the last 2 ^^
I guess this means you agree with Mora's idea.
Overall, if you think something is imbalanced, I think the best way to tell Blizz is use it to your advantage during the beta and at the same time tell people about it. Then people will start to notice if something really is overpowered/underpowered. This is what the beta is for, no?
|
On March 28 2010 15:58 BC.KoRn wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2010 10:24 hifriend wrote:On March 26 2010 10:22 BC.KoRn wrote:On March 26 2010 10:03 NET wrote:
Just an idea, maybe blizzard should also release a statement along side the patch notes in order for the starcraft community to have a better understanding of what is going through their heads. This will keep everyone from playing guessing games and auto complaining about everything.
On a side note, why kill DT's even more T_T... Very unlikely, that would only cause problems for Blizzard. Why would it cause problems? I thought it was a good suggestion actually. Because if Blizzard tells you why they made a certain change or basically says why they do anything (game balance specifically) people on forums can use that against them in the future. If Blizzard goes back on something they said or thought people can be like "Oh hey but you said this before blah blah blah." It all has to do with professionalism and having a good public image...they are not being paid to tell you what they think. The game is for us to figure out on our own
What? I believe they should be held accountable for the changes they make to a game people pay for. It might piss me off but at least I would know WHY they did what they did.
This was the primary problem I had with WoW and balance. They never ever told you why they did what they did generally because that way they can hide a lot of their shall we say...secrets? Going by the comments that some of the WoW balancing team made they barely even played the game.
Now while I don't think it's the same with SC2 they really should explain to you just why they do what they do.
|
On March 28 2010 18:03 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2010 15:58 BC.KoRn wrote:On March 26 2010 10:24 hifriend wrote:On March 26 2010 10:22 BC.KoRn wrote:On March 26 2010 10:03 NET wrote:
Just an idea, maybe blizzard should also release a statement along side the patch notes in order for the starcraft community to have a better understanding of what is going through their heads. This will keep everyone from playing guessing games and auto complaining about everything.
On a side note, why kill DT's even more T_T... Very unlikely, that would only cause problems for Blizzard. Why would it cause problems? I thought it was a good suggestion actually. Because if Blizzard tells you why they made a certain change or basically says why they do anything (game balance specifically) people on forums can use that against them in the future. If Blizzard goes back on something they said or thought people can be like "Oh hey but you said this before blah blah blah." It all has to do with professionalism and having a good public image...they are not being paid to tell you what they think. The game is for us to figure out on our own What? I believe they should be held accountable for the changes they make to a game people pay for. It might piss me off but at least I would know WHY they did what they did. This was the primary problem I had with WoW and balance. They never ever told you why they did what they did generally because that way they can hide a lot of their shall we say...secrets? Going by the comments that some of the WoW balancing team made they barely even played the game. Now while I don't think it's the same with SC2 they really should explain to you just why they do what they do.
The end of the second paragraph is just stupid. While I agree that the communcation between community and devs have always been lacking, saying that the BALANCING team barely play WoW is just stupid.
Regardless, I'd be very interested in hearing why they make certain changes aswell - even more so during the beta just to see what they actually get to see that the majority obviously doesnt.
|
hm wtf
has anyone else noticed the new scv glitch from patch 6? it happens to me like every game that my scv walks really far away to build
so weird shit xd
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
On March 28 2010 14:35 CowGoMoo wrote:
32 page threads suck. i read the first 2 pages and the last 2 ^^
You didn't miss anything .
|
On March 28 2010 21:41 MorroW wrote:hm wtf has anyone else noticed the new scv glitch from patch 6? it happens to me like every game that my scv walks really far away to build so weird shit xd
i got that once as well.
|
United States4126 Posts
That's happened to me a lot, but I assumed that I just missed it in the other patches x_x
|
On March 27 2010 05:37 Zeke50100 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2010 05:13 lololol wrote:On March 27 2010 03:09 Zeke50100 wrote:
It's Blizzard's "subtle" way of making a push towards mech, not to mention that Vikings cost less gas now. Viking on the ground is basically a mech unit that is better than the Stalker in many, many ways. Vikings on the ground aren't more powerful than stalkers, and they have a higher cost and lower mobility, so no, they aren't better than stalkers in many many ways, they are better in one specific thing - destroying air, which is their main purpose(and the best unit in the game for that purpose) and the ground form is mostly to use up what you have left over, if the opponent stops making air or to harass undefended expos and such. Vikings have a ground cooldown of 1, and a base attack of 14. Stalkers have a cooldown of 1.44, and a base attack of 10 (+4 vs Armored). Vikings also equal the Stalker's range. The only thing a Stalker beats it at is movement speed, with 2.9531 compared to 2.25. Mobility isn't too big of a deal because it can transform into air, which is much more mobile than the Stalker, even with Blink (albeit requiring more micro and APM). They out-price the Stalker by 25 Minerals and 25 Gas, which I can grant you; however, that is a small price to get the top anti-air unit, along with a decent ground unit. It can soft-counter Banshees and Brood Lords (pretty well ) by being un-hittable, while the Stalker cannot. The Corruptor does not have enough range to be a successful counter, as well as Phoenixes (however, the Phoenix's speed can make up for it; a Viking can still transform into ground and be unhittable temporarily, and transform back to pseudo-hit and run). Both Roaches and Marauders can be beaten by a Viking much more efficiently by a Stalker, and even pseudo-hit and run via Transform micro. Both suck against Immortals, although the Viking can just fly away, while the Stalker can be trapped by ground units/terrain. Stalkers are evenly matched against Stalkers, while the Viking's superior attack speed will overpower a Stalker. Zealots are...melee And so are Archons, Zerglings, etc. Only Hydralisks, Marines, Stalker, and Sentry cannot be pseudo-hit and run by the Viking as ground units. However, a Hydralisk matches the Viking in movement speed, while having less range un-upgraded. Same can be said for Marines and Sentries, although their range cannot be upgraded (although Marines have stim). Note that Vikings will kill things 44% quicker than Stalkers against Armored, and 101.6% quicker than Stalkers against Light, due to both base attack (compared to bonus) and attack speed. Enough to support that Vikings are better than Stalkers, even as anti-ground?
Excellent post. Vikings are awesome even when not compared to stalkers. Personally I was wondering if Blizzard was "buffing" the Viking in Patch 6 to emphasize it in matches and see if it was overpowered. I could see them reduce the air range on the Viking to half and it still perform great.
But the one thing I'll argue in defense of the stalker comparison, is that stalkers + zealots (as meat shields) are stronger ground than marines + Vikings in specific situations, emphasis on specific. Honestly though, I feel a lot safer and potent/dangerous as Terran right now. Terran just needs to turtle in the right spots of the game and they do great.
|
Holy hell, why are we talking about Patch 6?
|
On March 28 2010 07:15 Dx Fx wrote:
There's one point which makes no sense for me. Why did they give High Templar and Dark Templar the armor light as additional but didn't add the armor light to the Ghost?
Nobody likes to admit it, but Blizzard is partial to the ghost. Hell after reading all the novels I'm partial too. They are just cool. Loved them in SC/BW, too even if they weren't the best units. =]
For fun (don't take me too seriously here) let's compare the ghost to the high templar.
Ghost special abilities, etc. - snipe, nuke, cloak, EMP, attack, hold fire. That's right Hold Fire... a whole new state of being just for the ghost. Basically extra damage mode, extreme damage (delayed), hiding, instant damage to shields/drain all mana AOE, the ability to attack at range with no mana/engery, and the ability to not attack.
High Templar special abilities - psi storm, feedback. One does AOE damage, and the other drains mana and does damage to a single target. Were you waiting for another? Oh wait, merge into an archon.
Not saying they aren't balanced... just saying it's funny if you compare them side by side. The ghost sounds pretty awesome.
As far as the real question, why they didn't make the ghost light... I expect it's because the ghost is often alone and more fragile at a glance if he is detected. Of course being detected is part of the trick. Whereas the High Templar are perhaps thought to be true support units that are supposed to be backed by a nearby army. Then again, that is very shortsighted to pigeonhole them... they can both serve either role. Maybe in patch 8 they'll make them light? Maybe because the only units that would matter much are hellions and banelings, and they just don't care if ghosts die sooner to them.
|
Is this note:
ou can now view any player's profile after completion of a game by right-clicking on their name in the score screen and choosing View Profile.
working? It's grey in my right-click menu.
|
only if the guy is still online, as far as I know.
If not. add him as a friend. view profile. remove him.
|
Oh god.. My heart just stopped for a second... I thought I saw patch 9 notes >.<
|
On April 22 2010 21:09 FreshVegetables wrote:
Oh god.. My heart just stopped for a second... I thought I saw patch 9 notes >.<
ye me too ;((
lock this thread plz
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/179/newcreepfortl.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/4135/glitchyk.png)
