EPTOn August 03 2010 08:15 flizz wrote:
The supply depot suggestion is ridiculous, get that out of here.
The supply depot suggestion is ridiculous, get that out of here.
about as ridiculous as a burrowing supply depot?
TvZ Balance Suggestions - Page 11
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Mindcrime
United States6899 Posts
about as ridiculous as a burrowing supply depot? | ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12024 Posts
On August 03 2010 08:20 FabledIntegral wrote: Considering the small map sizes, mech isn't really THAT immobile from what I've personally seen, and relying on a nydus worm always come off as a luck thing to me, unlike what a recall would do in BW. Which is why I personally doom drop instead of Nydus. Yeah, Doomdrop and Nydus, both fine. If anything it forces you to bring most of your units back, leaving room for a zerg counter up front. That's all I was maybe suggesting. Also, there's a good reason why depots were made to burrow, it made Terran bases almost impossible to walk around freely back in Broodwar, like, if you didn't place them perfectly, it'd take about an hour to get to the back of your base. | ||
|
LeDuck
Germany152 Posts
Most reasonable change is the 50 % for the bunker, wouldn't be surprised if this actually makes it into the game. | ||
|
Whole
United States6046 Posts
Lowering/Lifting Supply Depots revision: I don't like this change either. Just make it have a casting time to lower or raise. Or possibly add energy on the Supply Depot. Make it cost 50 energy to raise and lower. Start the Depot off with 100 energy. You can still use it normal, you just can't spam it deciding whether you want to attack or not. I still rather the casting time though. Bunker revision: Absolutely needed! The Bunker building animations should be changed to not be random. And Salvage needs to either take longer or give less back. People say that Salvage isn't a problem and doesn't win games. The thing is that a Terran can all-in Bunker rush, and if it fails, say "LOL nvm" and just salvage and retreat without losing anything. Viking/Thor: Yes! This is needed. The range is ridiculous on these units. If you nerf the Viking range, it needs to be buffed in other areas. But Thors can be nerfed and still be fine. Marauder: Again, I agree. It makes early game fights versus Terran pretty stupid. If you retreat versus a non-AI Terran, (actually AI can probably pull this off) then you will lose about 2 units per Marauder. With stim, it isn't even a question. Medivac: I kind of agree, but in bigger battles, I think the Medivac should heal this much. It is the problem that it is a drop ship AND a medic at the same time. So when you drop someone with a few units, it is devastating, but in bigger battles, it is fine. Maybe make it so that the Medivac has to chose between a Dropship or Medic, similar to a Warp Prism. Maybe make the switch time 5 to 10 seconds. Edit: To all of the people saying Terran is fine because they don't place in tournaments: The top Zerg players and Protoss players are way better than Terran right now. The fact that some Terran players are competing with people who currently play 12 hours a day and used to play Brood War 12 hours a day is crazy. | ||
|
hyouro
Denmark45 Posts
6/8 4/4 3/4 4/4 I can't remember the last one. | ||
|
arb
Noobville17921 Posts
On August 03 2010 04:04 Zoltan wrote: So this is a nerf terran thread? What about warpgates being redonkulous? or that zerg can make 14!!! drones at once off of 2 bases? Sorry I just had to get that out; onto the topic: Bunkers salvage time should definatly be increased, or the money got reduced to 50%, im with you on that. Mules: Maybe change the ability alltogether? I dont see dropping its energy in favor of making the mule more worthless. Proposed change: Mules are now permanent. Mules now harvest at the same rate as SCVs. Mules can now harvest vespene gas. (basically turns it into a free SCV that can't build structures). Energy cost may need to be increased/decreased for balance. Thor / Viking range- their range is really long for a reason, and changing that would really require a thoughrough re-work of terran AA in general. I vote no. Medics / medivacs have always been OP. Terran is the only race that does not have any natural regen at all, so you would expect their heal bus to actually have some effect on combat. Lowering the heal per second would really make the MMM strategy pretty useless. Marauder: Concussion shell cooldown? That would mean it would probably get one of those stupid atuocast buttons that would never cast when you need it- really increasing micro difficulty for terran infantry. Maybe if while giving it a cooldown you make the ability last significantly longer, and increase the slow%, than that would be OK. I feel like im the only person in this game having trouble in the TvZ matchup now as the T. Ultras are soo op. God forbid terran has to do something other than Stim and a click please help us for not wanting terran to be able to faceroll anymore Im in favor of nearly every change in the OP Terran is just soooooo much stronger than any other race if you handle them well Early game PvT is a god damn nightmare if they marauder rush or something stupid, stalkers and zealots are both rendered useless against shells | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
Haven't Artosis and Idra said on multiple occasions that making tanks capable of overkill again would effectively handle most, if not all the imbalance issues with Terran? Isn't the only unit cited by Tester in his "Terran is overpowered" interview the Siege Tank? On the individual ones: MULE - Easier idea: make it possible to inject larvae and chrono boost through the interface again--Protoss and Zerg have to hit their mechanic more often, but it's less intrusive to do so because they can keep more focus on the battlefield. Depot lifting/lowering - This is stupid. People would just go back to lifting their raxes to open/close wallins, and never waste energy on the ability. You know, like we did in SC1? Bunker salvage - Not sure about this one. Maybe will come back to it later. Thor/Viking & Marauder - I actually kind of like these changes, but I really doubt that they're necessary. Find me a player like Tester or Idra actually complaining about a unit that isn't the Siege Tank, and I'll be on board with these. As it stands, I have yet to see a high-level player of note actually complain about bio play in general. Medivac - Disagree. The medivac heal rate is the same, if not less, than the heal rate of the medic in SC1. Medivacs are also vastly less spammable than medics. If this is actually an issue, then it's a problem with the other races needing a buff, not Terran needing a nerf. | ||
|
RandomBS
United States130 Posts
| ||
|
ZaaaaaM
Netherlands1828 Posts
On August 03 2010 08:24 Mindcrime wrote: about as ridiculous as a burrowing supply depot? So, at first terran is OP because of tanks. Then the harassunits are too effective. After that mule is OP. Thor and viking range. And now supple depots come on... Everyone agrees that terran needs changes but the longer people are waiting for a patch the more things become overpowered. So many people looking at and crying about terrans, NO threads at all about trying to solve and beat those things considered op. Altho I only play in platinum ~9 I have yet to see toss and zerg abusing the fact that I leave my base kind of undefended while setting up this overpowered mech army in the middle of the map. Sure, warping in/dropping/nydus is a risk, but so is taking position in the middle of the map with an immobile army. | ||
|
KaRnaGe[cF]
United States355 Posts
My thought is to have the zerglings negate a percentage of splash damage. This change will introduce a whole new gameplay for zerg vs. mech. I think zerg is fine against BIO since baneling / muta / ling are so strong. But this simple change will help tremedously against a tutle / mech. Maybe it is a bad idea maybe it is good. Hasn't been tested yet its just an thought! | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On August 03 2010 08:29 LeDuck wrote: Don't like the mule change, wouldn't it be possible to summon like 10 mules into your opponents base to support a marine rush? Most reasonable change is the 50 % for the bunker, wouldn't be surprised if this actually makes it into the game. Well mules don't have an attack... and you'd think a marine rush would be weakened by the fact you had to get an OC in the first place instead of a second rax... | ||
|
mahnini
United States6862 Posts
On August 03 2010 08:38 TheYango wrote: MULE - Easier idea: make it possible to inject larvae and chrono boost through the interface again--Protoss and Zerg have to hit their mechanic more often, but it's less intrusive to do so because they can keep more focus on the battlefield. one of the reasons why blizzard removed that is because they wanted player to go back to their base more. i don't know what the fuss is about MULEs anyway. mechanics are almost impossible to balance and really have never been balanced even in BW. it's simply the price you pay for having diverse races. in fact, there is a large benefit for the harassing party when 50 energy is invested into one MULE which has 15 more hp than an scv and is completely necessary for a terran to keep up in resources. On August 03 2010 08:42 ZaaaaaM wrote: Altho I only play in platinum ~9 I have yet to see toss and zerg abusing the fact that I leave my base kind of undefended while setting up this overpowered mech army in the middle of the map. Sure, warping in/dropping/nydus is a risk, but so is taking position in the middle of the map with an immobile army. this is also a very large map issue. as maps get larger mech becomes less and less effective while the other races' mobility become more and more pronounced. currently, you can siege nearly half the map with a relatively small army because the maps are so tiny. | ||
|
vonterribad
Australia50 Posts
TvZ is just simply not a fun matchup. As it stands right now the TvZ game does not flow at all, it's constantly a case of the Zerg player bending over backwards to hold off attacks with eclectic units that have no structure or rhythm to them. Often it also involves strange economic builds (struggling for gas, abudance for minerals). I definitely think a lack of structure in the game for Zerg against Terran would definitely be a big concern for blizzard right now. | ||
|
sjschmidt93
United States2518 Posts
| ||
|
javy_
United States1677 Posts
1). cooldown on lowering/raising depots 2). cooldown on mules 3). making the minerals gained from salvaging bunkers 50-75% The rest of the balance ideas have been incredibly hilarious and ludicrous, coming from whiny zerg players looking for any excuse for why they lose. If you want to nerf terran you need to first play terran so that you can properly propose ideas from the terran point-of-view. This is important because if you simply have the HURF DURF TERRAN SO OP mentality, then you neglect the other matchups terran have to deal with; very few of the zerg players in this thread have brought up the implications of their nerf ideas in TvP. It's a good thing Blizzard doesn't take threads like this seriously. | ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12024 Posts
Also, the reason why Spinecrawlers/Spore crawlers have a cooldown is because they can attack and it would seriously be op if they could just unburrow move, then insta burrow. | ||
|
Icx
Belgium853 Posts
For example in PvT, protoss has constant chrono's on his probes, the terran is muling to keep up, but what happens when saturation is reached (wich doesnt take long in sc2) suddenly your doing something that the other races can't, getting more minerals then saturation allows. and it is not like P has an easy time getting extra bases. Imo Terrans really really underestimate the power of mules after saturation is reached. And what they allow you to do especially in more of the early game. | ||
|
hyouro
Denmark45 Posts
On August 03 2010 08:53 javy925 wrote: The only valid suggestions made thus far in the thread have been: 1). cooldown on lowering/raising depots 2). cooldown on mules 3). making the minerals gained from salvaging bunkers 50-75% The rest of the balance ideas have been incredibly hilarious and ludicrous, coming from whiny zerg players looking for any excuse for why they lose. If you want to nerf terran you need to first play terran so that you can properly propose ideas from the terran point-of-view. This is important because if you simply have the HURF DURF TERRAN SO OP mentality, then you neglect the other matchups terran have to deal with; very few of the zerg players in this thread have brought up the implications of their nerf ideas in TvP. It's a good thing Blizzard doesn't take threads like this seriously. You do know that we can say the same to you...You are Terran, play Zerg and see what we struggle with. | ||
|
enCore-
98 Posts
| ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On August 03 2010 08:52 vonterribad wrote: I notice a lot of people here want 'data' to validate that there is a problem with the TvZ matchup, although that is valid there is one major point that I think a lot of people miss (in my opinion anyway) and that is..... TvZ is just simply not a fun matchup. As it stands right now the TvZ game does not flow at all, it's constantly a case of the Zerg player bending over backwards to hold off attacks with eclectic units that have no structure or rhythm to them. Often it also involves strange economic builds (struggling for gas, abudance for minerals). I definitely think a lack of structure in the game for Zerg against Terran would definitely be a big concern for blizzard right now. Actually, I'm more interested in data validating that there is a problem with TvP. There's enough high-level consensus that TvZ (or at least, Tanks) are a balance issue. The problem is that virtually all of these changes affect TvP equally, if not more, and I have yet to see a high level player express distaste with regard to anything other than Tanks. As soon as we have either statistics or a a reputable high level player giving strong reasoning why this is an issue with more than just the mechanics of one unit, I'll be on board with some of these. On August 03 2010 08:55 enCore- wrote: wow, that viking video sure as hell looks fake, vikings are not that fast nor do they kill a void ray with 3-4 shots.... looks like a poor attempt to prove your point. It was a side project with the editor in another thread--his point was that if Viking range was lowered, it could be compensated by making them handle better, as demonstrated in the video. | ||
| ||
