| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
GodIsNotHere
Canada395 Posts
On August 03 2010 04:15 Dia wrote: lol do you even understand what he says? Read again and try to understand, ok ? Yes I know whats hes saying and yes medvac heal units after fights just like Protoss shield's regen out of combat/Zerg health will regen over time. | ||
|
Necrosjef
United Kingdom530 Posts
On August 03 2010 04:16 Jimmeh wrote: They're also amazingly fragile and easily sniped by just a few hydra shots. No they aren't. | ||
|
Takkara
United States2503 Posts
I'd like to see the cost of MULE raised to 100 before I'd like to see your choice for an alteration. This way still get 4 scans on a full tank, but only 2 mules. Would drastically lower the effect of mass muling. I'm not saying to do this, but if they had to make a change, that would be more sensible. The issue isn't that MULE is so strong, but that you can bank them up. You'd naturally then say "well then cap the Orbital's energy" but that hurts scanning as a source of demand for pooled energy. So, the only good solution is just to raise the cost of the MULE. (Doesn't have to be 100, but just more than 50 at least) Medivac: You say "A medivac supported army is essentially an army with an organic carapace upgrade." That's not true unless he has a medivac for every unit. However, it's possible they may need to tweak the healing rates. It's hard to say when you're making small adjustments. Marauder: If they give shells a cooldown, they have to raise the length of the slow, so that they can fulfill their intended purpose. This is just in my humble opinion. So then you have to way the good with the bad at that point. It might exacerbate the issue in all applicable cases, when halfway decent macro could just produce the exact same or worse effect. Supply Depots: I could not more vehemently disagree with this suggestion and I don't even main Terran. There might be a balance issue with Depot walls, but this is not the correct solution. At most, just give the conversion a delay like with Spine Crawlers and Spore Crawlers rooting. That way you can't just throw them down for your escaping units and up before the enemy follows you in. A 10 second channeled "switching spell" would be fine. Don't make it cost energy from an Orbital. That's not only a confusing mechanic but I'm almost sure the mechanic would feel awkward and obnoxious. Range: Probably sensible. I have no major comment here. Bunkers: The answer here is to only let you salvage for as you said 50-75% of the cost. I don't think they're OP, but they should cost you something. You shouldn't necessarily get something for nothing. I think people would still use them for the same abusive reasons though even with a 50% cost refund. | ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
| ||
|
LaLuSh
Sweden2358 Posts
On August 03 2010 04:15 FragKrag wrote: The problem with these balance 'suggestions' is that there are too just too goddamn many of them, and they are made with near complete disregard for other sides of the matchup (and probably even TvZ itself). It falls in the same hole as the WC3 'balance suggestions' where some kid just thinks up of everything he thinks is wrong and tries to correct them by making a huge list of balance changes. Make small but noticeable changes because it seems like most of the matchups are decently balanced already anyways. I don't agree with this kind of reasoning, as I've intentionally tried to make the first 3 proposed changes affect gameplay as little as possible. They're not even strictly speaking "balance changes". The last three ones shouldn't be taken as seriously (except for perhaps the Thor/Viking suggestion, as it's a real problem vs mech). | ||
|
Zoltan
United States656 Posts
On August 03 2010 04:13 tacrats wrote: reducing viking/thor ranges would require Rework of terran AA? I fail to see how you come to that conclusion. Every other race has to deal with not having a screen range on all of their units, reducing it a bit would not change anything one bit, except for making it more reasonable for other races to deal with it. Lowering Heal per second would not make MMM useless. How do you get that? Medivacs are already dropships and healers in one. Having ridiculous healing rates is even more OP. reducing it so ur units are arent impossible to kill in some situations would be fair. on range: and every other races units arent slow as balls. Vikings are the most patheticly slow AA unit in the game. If phoenixes or mutas go out of range, vikings can't get them back in range.. and thors... one of the slowets units in the game. They are basically a glorified turret. Medivacs heal rates aren't rediculous at all. If anything its the Marauder high HP and armor that makes the medivacs seemingly so powerful vs zerg. In addition, the medivacs themselves are pretty squishy, able to be mind controlled, and can run out of heal energy. It's not like they heal infinatly. MMM is pretty fragile mid-lategame as is, lowering heal rate would reduce it to a mainly early game strategy, and medivacs are tier 2.5. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On August 03 2010 04:04 Asagud wrote: Ndugu: "Theoretically, Terran macro is the hardest since they dont have hatcheries/warp, so that might be why mule is correspondingly by far the easiest macro mechanic." I don't agree, it's not hardest at all since you can queue up units, so theoretically this makes it alot easier, with zerg and protoss you have to be ready to create units exactly at the time the larvae arrive/cooldown completes. One more area where the terran way is more forgiving than both the zerg and protoss. To LaLush: Great post, I like your ideas. I also realize not all of them could be implemented cause then Terran would be underpowered =) Terran macro is significantly harder because of build time. Protoss can Warp in most of your army in 5 seconds. Zerg can have dozens of Larvae at a time. Terran have to wait for every single unit to build. This basically means a T army takes he longest to build and therefore you need more foresight in your macro. I think the MULE idea is a good one. I think the Supply Depot idea is a pretty bad one, mostly because it would make the ability useless and it would really hurt a lot of T options in general. I think the Bunker idea is also a fairly bad one. T *early* aggression is fairly limited without Bunkers, and this would make it much, much more costly to invest in a Bunker, which, again, is just limiting T options. Vikings are already basically paper airplanes - what makes them good is their range. I definitely think the Thor could do with a 1 or 2 range decrease, but not the Viking. I don't know if I agree with a cooldown on Concussive Shells. I always thought removing Marauder Stim was a better idea. I definitely don't agree with the Medivac change. Medivacs are already extremely costly and are the first targeted by the AI. Also, Marines have such low HP that if the Medivac's regen was any lower they could probably be out-DPS'd by damn near anything. I like the thought of the ideas and the fact that it was well-spoken and thought out, but people are going about this the wrong way. We shouldn't be trying to nerf Terran - I mean really, everyone bitches and cries, "Terran can do too much!" Is that a bad thing? Uh, no. The bad thing is that Zerg can't do anything. They are extremely bland and have very few options. THIS is what should be fixed. We shouldn't mindlessly nerf Terran to make the game more boring in general, we should buff Zerg so they actually have options. | ||
|
Defrag
Poland414 Posts
That way there would be no spawning of 16 mules late in the game when some player forgot to macro at all and found himself with 4 full CC's. That would actually punish players for having bad macro and oh, yeah - no mining out of gold expo withing 30s. | ||
|
LaLuSh
Sweden2358 Posts
On August 03 2010 04:19 Takkara wrote: Supply Depots: I could not more vehemently disagree with this suggestion and I don't even main Terran. There might be a balance issue with Depot walls, but this is not the correct solution. At most, just give the conversion a delay like with Spine Crawlers and Spore Crawlers rooting. That way you can't just throw them down for your escaping units and up before the enemy follows you in. A 10 second channeled "switching spell" would be fine. Don't make it cost energy from an Orbital. That's not only a confusing mechanic but I'm almost sure the mechanic would feel awkward and obnoxious. I like this suggestion. This might work. Didn't really like the critique on the MULEs however. That'd just make gold expos ridiculously more powerful. | ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On August 03 2010 04:15 ILIVEFORAIUR wrote: The OP looks more like a "let's nerf terran!" post than a "balancing" post This. No offense mate, but all these changes you suggest, most of them are completely unnesecary and missing the point completely. Reducing Viking/Thor range seriously? Thors are easily counterable by mutas if you don't stack them up and vikings die so fast to literally anything, without the viking range it'd be far too difficult to even try and kill brood lords late game without losing all your vikings. Bunkers, fair enough as I only really use them for defense rather than offense, but even so. Not being able to salvage them would make them pointless again. What you seem to not understand is if you don't have units in a bunker, it can't actually do anything, it just sits there like a plum. Where as Spine crawlers you can move around and Cannons stay effective at firing even without anything in as long as they are powered. To get full use out of a bunker, you need the 100 minerals for the bunker itself, then a further 200 minerals of marines to fill it out. I don't actually feel TvZ is horribly imbalanced anyway, at higher levels right now it seems rather balanced, and most of the time zerg lose due to hurass. All this is, and what it seems to be is the opposite of brood war, If a zerg mutalisk hurassed you in BW, either you had to overdo it on turrets or leave a bunch of medic/marine back in your base to deal with it, now the shoes on the other foot with Hellions being really good at toasting drones, forcing you to build more. As good as, if not more effective than good Muta hurass in Broodwar. If you make half of these changes, it'd swing the matchup completely the other direction and that won't solve anything. The other thing I'm confused with, is they say tanks are too powerful, but can't you just roach burrow up right next to them then unburrow? I mean it's not every day I shove loads of turrets or have any detection by my tanks to see any burrowed roaches. EDIT: Also, lowering the vikings range, would make dealing with range upgraded Collosus in TvP incredibly harder than it already is, you'd not be able to do it with vikings otherwise you'd get sniped instantly by stalkers. | ||
|
GhostBusters
United States198 Posts
| ||
|
Graven
United States314 Posts
On August 03 2010 04:08 Necrosjef wrote: Although I don't think Terran being too strong is the core issue. Zerg is simply too weak. That's semantics. Right now PvZ is awesome. It still needs some tweaking, but it's balanced and fun for the most part. Terran are inherently imbalanced...they're extremely versatile by design and with the aid of the current map pool can deny early scouting, leaving Zerg not enough time to react. In ZvP, Zerg can work toward Hydra regardless since they counter all T1 so well, but in ZvT, Zerg can't play blind because Terran have a hard counter for every Zerg unit. Assuming no drastic concept changes are made and the map pool remains the same, my solutions are: 1. a) Make overlord speed T1 -- my fear with this is that between Queen production and the upgrade, it will delay the Lair too much b) Make the Overseer T1 - maybe with a Spawning Pool requirement, which would force players to decide between ling Speed and the Seer. Contaminate may be too powerful in the early game though. 2. Make Spine Crawlers build faster - This way if terran move out of their walled in base with a mass of units, Zerg can construct some last minute defense before the army arrives. | ||
|
Aberu
United States968 Posts
| ||
|
iEchoic
United States1776 Posts
Nerfing the thor's AA in any significant way will completely break the matchup. Vikings do not counter mutalisks. Terran only has two units that are "effective" against mutas - thors and marines. Thors are not as effective as people tend to believe (day[9] has been saying this for a while and he is very right), and marines are effective. If the thor's AA ever reaches a point where it becomes less than a cost-effective counter against mutas, Terran will only be able to counter mutas with marines. As soon as that happens, muta/bling will be far, far too powerful. Terran needs to have a strong counter to mutas that is not a light unit so that Zerg players can't force marines with muta and then obliterate them with banelings or infestors. If the Thor range is reduced, covering units from mutas in large battles will be impossible. Mutas will force terran to make marines. Zerg players need to stop trying to get the thor's AA nerfed and think about the bigger picture. | ||
|
Count_Waltz
United States48 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 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. . serious? Are you kidding? So you want to give terran a supplyless scv. towards the midgame if you keep pumping those mules you can start sacrificing your scvs and get a stupid army. I mean a 200/200 terran army isn't already the best army in the game. Lets take all that supply from workers out and make it really unbeatable. /zvt rage | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
That's not semantics at all, that's a very distinguishing fact. Really. All of the Terran haters are basically screaming, "Make the game more boring by nerfing Terran!" Instead, how about we actually make Zerg truly viable and able to do well so we can see more varied play instead of nerfing and limiting Terran options. | ||
|
talecK
Canada35 Posts
I agree with a few things in this post. The bunkers salvage mechanic does need to be changed, not just because of the "free rush" opportunity it offers but I would say mainly for the expansion denial mechanic that has come out of the meta game. As a diamond terran player I always build a bunker at my zerg opponents nat then salvage it when the lings come to attack it, delaying the opponents expansion basically for free. On the subject of macro mechanics I don't think it should be made any harder, As Ndugu pointed out the macro itself for terran is probably the hardest. Also, Terran's have to budget between scans and mules as well. I don't think this is a big issue in any of the matchups though. I think it would really just widen the skill gap between terran players. In terms of supply depots I think its fine. Every race has a 'space management mechanic' whether its inherent or not. Your supply depots float around. Protoss can warp in units at pylons in front of their base as to not have to run through a maze of buildings. Also, its important to note that the side an scv ends on after construction isn't deterministic really. Protoss / zerg players don't have to worry about trapping probes / drones whereas terran would if you made the lowering prohibitively expensive( building depots properly in BW was definately a feat ). It really wouldn't change the walling mechanic much ( most terran players wall off with unit producing buildings now just to be safe vs banelings ) it would just make the terran bases a mess in smaller maps once again widening the terran skill gap. I'm not sure about the marauder nerf, never heard Z's complaining about marauders at all really. On the subject of Terran's range, they've always had the trade off of range / firepower for mobility but this has been beaten to death and I won't even go there. Instead I think that you should consider what nerfing viking range would do to the TvP matchup. Terran would have no real answer to collosus / stalker. On medivacs, not really sure why you wanna nerf the heal since your issue was with mech or why your saying that drops are too abusable? (nerf drops?). Also I think that saying medivacs are like giving every terran unit old OC is a totally unfair comparison. That would be if you had a medivac for every single terran unit and they were free. I'm not sure why you don't mention ultralisks in this post, since late game ultralisks are a serious threat to mech imo. Really though I think the big issue for TvZ is maps. If we had more maps like metaopolis I think TvZ would be much more balanced. I think this matchup is similar to how it was in BW. It's terran favored at a lower level. If you A-moved any zerg army into a terran army you lost. You had to out expand the terran and abuse zergs mobility. Better maps would help zerg out on this front ( no more kulas ). Finally, this is what I keep wondering. If Terran is so broken, and zerg is so bad. Why does Idra win everything? Why were there no terrans in the finals of KOTB? Why when asked who were the best players at the end of the beta did idra mention himself another zerg and a protoss player? | ||
|
Kurumi
Poland6130 Posts
On August 03 2010 04:29 iEchoic wrote: Zerg players need to stop trying to get the thor's AA nerfed and think about the bigger picture. Turrets,Mr.Terran. | ||
|
iEchoic
United States1776 Posts
Excellent post, I was unaware turrets existed. Surely you should be building turrets in the middle of every fight. | ||
|
Takkara
United States2503 Posts
On August 03 2010 04:24 LaLuSh wrote: I like this suggestion. This might work. Didn't really like the critique on the MULEs however. That'd just make gold expos ridiculously more powerful. With my MULE suggestion, I wouldn't increase the power of MULEs, only double the energy cost. It's just easier to implement it that way than to think of it like "Lower the cost of scan to 25 energy, and lower the maximum energy of the Orbital Command to 100." That's functionally the same thing as just raising the cost of MULEs to 100 and leaving scan and max energy alone. How would that make gold expos more powerful? It's at least better than it is now. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War actioN Dota 2 349Stork  331Snow 287firebathero  214BeSt 176Pusan 148Aegong 84TY 77Shinee 72JYJ65 [ Show more ] League of Legends Other Games FrodaN728 Beastyqt594 C9.Mang0427 Hui .338 Lowko325 elazer220 Happy195 Liquid`VortiX171 Fuzer  168ArmadaUGS155 KnowMe127 Mew2King105 Trikslyr49 |
|
Replay Cast
PiGosaur Monday
Replay Cast
The PondCast
Replay Cast
HomeStory Cup
HomeStory Cup
BSL: ProLeague
SOOP
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
