EPTby the same logic we could say no ling speed until ultralisk cavern.
Explain that logic plz. lol
TvZ Balance Suggestions - Page 78
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ch4ppi
Germany802 Posts
Explain that logic plz. lol | ||
|
fAnTaCy
United States893 Posts
On September 14 2010 21:30 ElitePlaying wrote: Hahaha :D Lol! How about making playing with Terran upgradeable too? On September 14 2010 23:43 hoovehand wrote: by the same logic we could say no ling speed until ultralisk cavern. Seriously, where do people get this "logic". I see this "logic" all the time and it never makes ANY sense. Someone says "Hey, this terran nerf might make this mu a little easier" and some terran just has to be like "OH WELL THEN HOW ABOUT TO THIS MINOR CHANGE WE MAKE LINGS T3". Seriously, think about what the hell you're saying it's really getting old when people post random crap like that, It reminds me all the time why I can never take strategy forums too seriously on here >.<. sorry /rant | ||
|
cromat
Afghanistan100 Posts
| ||
|
ch4ppi
Germany802 Posts
Actually this isnt such a bad Idea 0.o First of all I thought crap... but then...if it would be a research requiering a Starport (this would acutally make sense somehow)... Thumbs up from me. | ||
|
Elwar
953 Posts
It loses or is break-even with nearly all the units in the game based on cost. Its far worse than marines and not any more massable. It has the DPS but not the health to make use of it. I mean I guess you could say it needs the support of lings/roaches which tank while it deals damage, but I don't see why it should not be better than a stimmed marauder or stalker which are anti-armored specialists when its also an expensive tier 2 ranged unit that isn't even amored. I just don't get its role. I'm not the best player ever obviously, but I also don't see pro players do that great with the hydra in regular circumstances (ie. unless they drastically outnumber the opponent). I don't think its shocking most of the top zergs like the mutalisk because it at least grants map control and has a more defined role in terms of what it useful against. I feel like hydras should be able to do much better against MMM balls and thors, instead of terrible against the first and bad against the second, they should really force the terran to make more tanks or hellions. As-is it doesn't matter what unit you are getting as terran, they all do very very well against the hydra. | ||
|
Sixes
Canada1123 Posts
On September 15 2010 00:14 Elwar wrote: I'm wondering what role Blizzard sees for the hydra. At the moment its only really used if air control is taken before the zerg can go mutalisk, or defending against protoss early (and/or attacking if you you're winning anyway). It loses or is break-even with nearly all the units in the game based on cost. Its far worse than marines and not any more massable. It has the DPS but not the health to make use of it. I mean I guess you could say it needs the support of lings/roaches which tank while it deals damage, but I don't see why it should not be better than a stimmed marauder or stalker which are anti-armored specialists when its also an expensive tier 2 ranged unit that isn't even amored. I just don't get its role. I'm not the best player ever obviously, but I also don't see pro players do that great with the hydra in regular circumstances (ie. unless they drastically outnumber the opponent). I don't think its shocking most of the top zergs like the mutalisk because it at least grants map control and has a more defined role in terms of what it useful against. I feel like hydras should be able to do much better against MMM balls and thors, instead of terrible against the first and bad against the second, they should really force the terran to make more tanks or hellions. As-is it doesn't matter what unit you are getting as terran, they all do very very well against the hydra. This is a good point. Comparing it to the stalker (roughly same cost, same range, attacks air+ground) the stalker is earlier (gate+cyber versus spawning pool+lair+hydra den) is directly on the tech tree (protoss get it automatically with cyber on their way to anything, would be a little like getting hydra with lair) has the same range as an upgraded hydra and moves a lot faster on the offense. Now we could argue the roles in the race and DPS versus toughness all day BUT the main thing here is the upgrade. Blink makes stalkers great in the mid/late game, they get better against lings, they become faster, can abuse cliffs etc. Hydra range is essentially just a tax to get them to be worth their cost. It doesn't make them better late game, doesn't give them any utility ... It seems like hydras are just there because they are so iconic in broodwars but the designers didn't want to just copy paste ling => hydra => ultra so they tried to mess with the hydra, didn't get anywhere but couldn't take it out. There is really no need for an expensive glass cannon with no utility or mobility in zerg. Every zerg unit has some good mobility except the hydra (roaches with upgrades are ok and moving burrowed has it's uses). I would like to see some kind of useful upgrade for the hydra. With blink, hardened shields, concussive shells, cloaking, snipes etc you'd think they could find something for zerg (burrowed move is cute I guess). Now a movement upgrade (off creep movement) would be bland but useful. Slowing spines are already taken (though why the marauder who has stim rather than the hydra I don't know) and any kind of damage upgrade doesn't solve the underlying issue with mobility (even if they had 100 damage they still couldn't get near a couple of siege tanks or storms or anything because most wet paper bags are tougher). I just really don't see how to make hydras useful, they took a mass core unit then put it way up a tech tree. In broodwar it was great due to low cost, attacking air (and it could get speed) and low tech (so it wasn't competing with mutas directly). More and more I just rely on lots of queens and in cases of huge air pressure I prefer corruptors or mutas (mutas kill VRs and vikings, corruptors kill the rest) or just crushing the front with roach/ling/ultra. | ||
|
xvoraz
Hungary46 Posts
First, when thinking about balance changes we need to think about little tiny things. Huge things like linking supply depot to a Orbital Command ability (sorry for qouting this first I agree with most of your post LL which seems to be thought over) or making all zerg units faster or making heal or unload researchable, so these changes though maybe solving one problem would generate 10 other. Because big changes are unpredictable, not just by us but by nobody. So once again we have to think about little tiny changes that do not creat an entire new style of play but gives that little advantage that is just neccessary. The aim is not to erase Reapers and Banshees and Mech and Bio from the game (however much we Zerg and Toss players would want that  , just make them a little bit less potent.Each race is unique. For example there is nothing to worry about that Terrans do not have the production capabilities like Zerg larvae. It is just different to play Zerg and Terran. I would even argue that it is maybe not neccessary that Zerg have a super cool unit combos like Bio or Mech. It is entirely possible that Zerg is race is a 'reactionary race' (by Husky) where you need to think ahead and with the nice production possibilities do the best counters. Here I do not want to say that there is no imba, I think there is, I just want to say ther is no need that all races be equal in every way, different races need different style of play so that you could find the one most fitting for you. . Speaking about actual balance suggestions. Be aforementioned that I was a Terran player back in beta and am now a Zerg and have also played Random though none of this was at high level. -First I want to note that there is not much discussion about unit costs. Apart from nerfing or buffing, cost changes can also be a good alternatives. As a former Terran player I just loved Tanks. I mean emotionally. Seeing them nerfed to 35 dmg??? Ridiculous. I would rather love to see them double cost than this weak. Especially raising gas cost would force you to make some hard decisions and less Tanks on the field. -Other not so popular suggestion is moving researches. For example making Roach speed available before Lair is not such a giant change like "1 supply per Roach" it just would give you more verstility early game. -About Marauders and Concussion shells. What is ridiculous to me that it is such a fantastic and must have upgrade and it costs 50/50 = basicly free. I think a fair price would be around 150/150. The exact price could be argued I just want to say that instead of some major change like making it autocast or moving it one tier up just increase the cost (let it be 100,1500 or 200 it should be trialed out). We could go on with this. Considering MMM, Mech, Zerg buffing (and I agree the good way is nerfing Terran AND buffing Zerg) for ever. I believe this is basically a fairly balanced game. We tend to note the imba things since it is highly competitive, but nevertheless if we keep some distance we will see that it is not that imba after all. What I want to emphasize once again is to think little. since little changes are more predictable and will have just the small effect that is required to restore balance. | ||
|
shtdisturbance
Canada613 Posts
| ||
|
XSmokeX
United States16 Posts
On September 15 2010 00:14 ch4ppi wrote: @cromat Actually this isnt such a bad Idea 0.o First of all I thought crap... but then...if it would be a research requiering a Starport (this would acutally make sense somehow)... Thumbs up from me. Another idea would be to make SCVs have the ability to add rockets on to buildings, once the starport has been built. This would make more sense than an upgrade in terms of the actual act of the building lifting off, plus it would get an scv off the mineral for a while, which as a zerg player, I'm okay with. | ||
|
Kaptein[konijn]
Netherlands110 Posts
I'd also like to add the suggestion to make the dropping ability an upgrade for medivacs. | ||
|
ch4ppi
Germany802 Posts
That might be true. but most Terrans are swimming in Minerals when they are at 3+ bases. Also they have a bunch of possible scans ready nearly anytime. Terran already needs less workers than toss and Zerg. But the problem with your argumentation is, that an 90% invulnerable Expansion is more worth than any mule or scan. | ||
|
Bluerain
United States348 Posts
except u dont need detectors to attack speedlings... | ||
|
frozen_water92
Singapore10 Posts
My main discussion here is mainly about marauders. We all know about how well marauders with concussive shells can kite and kill units with the proper micro, thus making these low-mid tier units very cost effective. I have 3 suggestions on what Blizzard can do to make the game more balanced especially for players who go against Terran bio: 1) Marauders concussive shells should be given a cooldown period just like charge(for zealots) just so melee units stand a better chance of doing some damage before dying or just to run away. Some of you would say that there would be no difference with or without a cooldown period because slow lasts for a short duration and if the cooldown is equivalent to that time, then it's as good as no cooldown whatsoever. However, this can be improved if lets say the cooldown period is in such a way that, assuming that a marauder is standing still and shooting, its first shot has slow, second and third shots doesn't have slow, forth shot has slow and so on... Wouldn't it be as fair as a zealot charging into a battle, slicing and dicing for awhile as charge is on cooldown and then charge again after several hits? 2) Secondly, just as battlecruisers were supposed to have two types of upgrades in the alpha version of SC2, marauders could be given two types of attacks to choose from. The first type could be the normal concussive shell slow but deals no bonus damage to armoured units. The second type could be the normal bonus damage to armoured units but at the cost of its slow. Players can choose which type of attack they want to use under different circumstances. In addition, when a player chooses to switch a marauder from one type of attack to the other, a cooldown period has to be incurred before they can switch again. In order to distinguish the two types of attacks, distinct physical features can be added to the marauders so the players on both sides can tell which type is equipped currently and how both players can use the situation to their advantage. 3) Give marauders energies just like ghosts and give concussive shells energy costs. However, the energy of the marauder should not be greater than its hit points so that feedbacks cannot 1 hit KO a marauder with full energy. Please give constructive comments(if any) on my suggestions. | ||
|
BEARDiaguz
Australia2362 Posts
On September 10 2010 23:52 -Archangel- wrote: As a zerg player without thought I would exchange the Zerg regeneration for Zerg version of medivac or just medics. for 300/300 + 100 crystals per each overlord Zerg does not get terran medivacs. Terran gets a slow moving armored unit that when it dies leaves Zerg supply blocked. Also once it drops its units it serves no purpose. Yes it can put creep down but by time enough creep is spread in that area units are either dead or you already won. Wait, What? You mean you pay 300/300 to make your supply depots also transports, also morphable into detectors. For mass dropping that's more cost effective then the other 2 races. Yeah, I'd love it if My supply depots did more for me then just supply. Well, ok, they do stop me from dying early game, but you get my point. Excep t the 1 or 2 depots that form protective barriers and stop me from dying to rushing bullshit, depots serve oh so little purpose, not like those fancy pylons and their warp in, or those fancy zergs and their flying, scout, transporting supply depots. as a T player, my main qualm with this matchup is taht the midgame totally sucks for Zerg. It has no aggression at all, only passive play until hive tech, unless the Terran screws up his early game massively. As a T,I have 5 raxes, 2 fac and a starport and ALL the tech I need up in place, and he hasn't even started his infestor pit yet. As for hydras, they just need more hp. Give them 100 hp and see what happens. It'll take like 3 tank hits to kill them, so that's all well and good. Keep 'em a bit slow off creep, keep 'em with the same damage and 'utility', just give 'em enough hp to actually keep standing when they get shot a bit. And the only thing that needs changing about marauders is how fast they take down a nexus/hatchery. Everything else is fine. | ||
|
heishe
Germany2284 Posts
On September 15 2010 14:34 iaguz wrote: Wait, What? You mean you pay 300/300 to make your supply depots also transports, also morphable into detectors. For mass dropping that's more cost effective then the other 2 races. you have no idea what you're talking about. a zerg player can't just invest 300/300 into a crappy drop unit (I guess you copper player didn't notice it yet, but overlords are a lot slower than medivacs and warp prisms, plus they also have super slow acceleration), just like a toss can't just invest robocost + warp prism cost and just like the terran player can't invest starport cost + medivac cost just to drop. the difference here is the tech tree. a lot of the time the protoss player will already have payed the 200/100 for the robo bay because he needs the other units from it, and a lot of times the terran player will have medivacs anyways because he needs heal for his bio. with zerg that isn't the case. not even speed is researched anymore except in longer games simply because paying 100/100 at a crucial time (when midgame pushes are about to attack you) is just too much for a zerg player to spare, and let's not even talk about 300/300 for dropping. for gods sake, stop making such retarded arguments and use your brain. by your logic zerg could just build all tech buildings at once and tech all upgrades at once since it counters everything our opponent has. but guess what, einstein, our resources are scarce as they are, we can't just spend 300/300 on the worst dropping unit of all 3. plus of course, when we drop 4 hydras, they don't demolish a nexus in 20 seconds like marauders do. | ||
|
Grond
599 Posts
Hydralisk Tier 2 100 mineral 50 gas 2 supply 80 health 18 DPS with upgrades 2 Marines Tier 1 100 minerals 0 gas 2 supply 110 health 31 DPS with upgrades Immortal Tier 2 250 minerals 100 gas 4 supply 300 health 18 DPS with upgrades 45 DPS with upgrades vs Armored 2 Marauders Tier 1 200 minerals 50 gas 4 supply 250 health 26 DPS with upgrades 52 DPS with upgrades vs Armored | ||
|
BEARDiaguz
Australia2362 Posts
The problem is that Zerg don't have much to drop (baneling carpet bombing is lulzy, but not great) which is not the fault of the overlord, more the fault of the rest of the Zerg midgame. I'll admit the 100/100 speed cost increase was stupid. Most zergs just get an overseer because it costs as much to do the same thing (ie, scout) and you also get a detector and a few spells! Neato Also, read all my post, specifically the part where i mention the only problem atm with marauders is their HQ snipishness. | ||
|
Ry-Masta-T
United States478 Posts
On September 15 2010 15:01 iaguz wrote: Hey, the argument was that using overlords as dropships was sooooooooooooo expensive. My counterpoint is that no, they are not seeing as you pay a one time 300/300 (and you also have nydus!) to get your already scouting and flying supply depots to also be dropships! You don't need anything more then Lair Tech to GET this, and this lasts for the whole game wheras when a medivac blows up I spend a whole 100/100 to get a new one. The problem is that Zerg don't have much to drop (baneling carpet bombing is lulzy, but not great) which is not the fault of the overlord, more the fault of the rest of the Zerg midgame. I'll admit the 100/100 speed cost increase was stupid. Most zergs just get an overseer because it costs as much to do the same thing (ie, scout) and you also get a detector and a few spells! Neato Also, read all my post, specifically the part where i mention the only problem atm with marauders is their HQ snipishness. You realize that having flying depots in alot of situations is a hindrance, not a boon (i.e. vs phoenix/vikings)? | ||
|
heishe
Germany2284 Posts
On September 15 2010 15:01 iaguz wrote: Hey, the argument was that using overlords as dropships was sooooooooooooo expensive. My counterpoint is that no, they are not seeing as you pay a one time 300/300 (and you also have nydus!) to get your already scouting and flying supply depots to also be dropships! I'll direct you to a few posts above yours you have no idea what you're talking about. a zerg player can't just invest 300/300 into a crappy drop unit (I guess you copper player didn't notice it yet, but overlords are a lot slower than medivacs and warp prisms, plus they also have super slow acceleration), just like a toss can't just invest robocost + warp prism cost and just like the terran player can't invest starport cost + medivac cost just to drop. the difference here is the tech tree. a lot of the time the protoss player will already have payed the 200/100 for the robo bay because he needs the other units from it, and a lot of times the terran player will have medivacs anyways because he needs heal for his bio. with zerg that isn't the case. not even speed is researched anymore except in longer games simply because paying 100/100 at a crucial time (when midgame pushes are about to attack you) is just too much for a zerg player to spare, and let's not even talk about 300/300 for dropping. for gods sake, stop making such retarded arguments and use your brain. by your logic zerg could just build all tech buildings at once and tech all upgrades at once since it counters everything our opponent has. but guess what, einstein, our resources are scarce as they are, we can't just spend 300/300 on the worst dropping unit of all 3. plus of course, when we drop 4 hydras, they don't demolish a nexus in 20 seconds like marauders do. | ||
|
Nazza
Australia1654 Posts
The Hydra has definitely fallen out of usage, though. It is extermely cost ineffective. If I wanted anti air, I would go Mutas/Corruptors. Hydras in BW were more effective at dealing with large units. I'm suprised that they aren't given an anti-armored unit status in SC2. Whilst they mostly succeeded in giving the Ultra new life in SC2, they have pretty much failed at giving this iconic Zerg unit any real role. I remember someone posting up the ratio of attack times of Zerglings compared to other t1 units. In BW, a Zergling had a cooldown of 8, Marines had a CD of 15, and Zealots had a CD of 22. In SC2, Zerglings have a cooldown of .7, whilst Marines have a CD of .86, and Zealots 1.2. Whilst I do understand that the developers want to discourage tactics like 6pool, and that Queens have spawn larva, and that you can morph banelings from them, I don't think it justifies quite so large a nerf. I do agree that bunkers need to have their salvage time lengthened. I'm not in favor of removing any of the new abilities, but if an attacking bunker can be salvaged with absolutely no risk, then it is pretty ridiculous. I'm thinking that salvage was given to the Terrans to give them more of a "mobile nomad" theme, fitting alongside lift-off (which btw, is a trademark SC Terran ability). An increase from 3 seconds to 6 seconds would give the enemy enough time to destroy the bunker, giving more risk for the Terran to make an agressive move. | ||
| ||
