|
yea tbh, I think the tank is being slightly overnerfed. How many lings does 1 tank shot kill? What happens when the target ling has armor? etc
I'm also kind of surprised that we didn't see any mention of thor ground range being reduced or hellion hp being reduce.
Also, I'm really really surprised that the only map change is Desert Oasis. Every single map has problems and they need to be addressed.
Terrans need to remember also that self splash from tanks on their bio balls will be lessened as well. Although since lings are living longer and more able to get to their units it's also good that their tanks are not 1 shotting their marines as well.
|
On August 28 2010 12:34 VanGarde wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2010 12:31 Spyridon wrote:On August 28 2010 12:27 VanGarde wrote:On August 28 2010 12:16 Spyridon wrote:On August 28 2010 12:11 HalfAmazing wrote:On August 28 2010 11:58 Grimjim wrote:
The BC nerf and Zealot is most likely because of the lower leagues.
Diamond is only the top 20% of players. The bottom 80% are probably playing the game by randomly smashing their heads against their keyboards, metaphorically of course. But the minute a Bronze league Terran learns that massing BCs is very powerful, or that a Protoss learns a two gate proxy is very difficult to stop, they are going to anger a ton of the opponents they face. The point is that Blizzard is catering to these noobs at our expense. We are rightfully outraged.  I don't object to Terran getting nerfed, I object to the seemingly random manner in which they're going about doing so. The Marauder has been a problem since day one, and for some dark and inexplicable reason they choose to nerf everything but the Marauder. I'm convinced someone in a position of authority at Blizzard has been protecting it, keeping it safe from the evil nerfstick. That person probably worships a Marauder idol at night. He dances, and prances and sings to his Marauder effigy in a bizarre ritual. My explanation may disillusion you, but when only one logical explanation remains, no matter how uncomfortable, it must be accepted as truth. Blizzard does not balance around the "noobs". If you do not recognize the reasoning behind the nerfs, you are most likely the "noob". All of the issues discussed (aside from the BC change) I have seen discussed by multiple Pro players. They are pretty commonly recognized as existing. Tanks have never been the problem in TvZ, the midgame and lategame between terran and zerg have been relatively balanced. The main reason for the imbalance in the matchup has been the many ways that terran can harass and wreck havoc on zerg economy in the early game, that and slow mech death pushes. The latter does not really work anymore now that zerg players magically realized that you spread your mutas out agianst an anti air aoe unit. Nerfing the tanks is the opposite of what the matchups needs. The tank is not only the only unit which were not capable of harassing or abusing early game zerg in the first place, nerfing it and reducing its place in the mid/late game as a core unit will only fuel terrans to feel pressured to play even more abusive, with the lack of a strong backbone in the late game and the strength of zerg tier 3 you will just be even more motivated to try and harass the game to an end early on. TvZ was fine in late game, and imbalanced in the early game, so they go about it by nerfing the tank and the battlecruiser. The logic is lost on me. All races, not just Zerg, complained about tanks power mid-game. Look at the situation report... "Siege tanks in large numbers are performing too well in all matchups. In the mid- to late-game, siege tanks are too dominant against all ground units" I am sure a lot of people complained about tanks in mid-game. I know a lot of people were complaining about tanks performing too well in the mid- to late- game. That: A) Does not mean those people were right, and B) Does not mean that that was the reason that the matchup was imbalanced in the end.
I'm pretty sure blizzard is balancing heavily based on the top Korean players, as well as some of the other top players. If you have watched some of the Korean starcraft 2 clan wars, you would know how often zerg is killed with a fast mid-game tank push, before they can tech high enough to get ultras or broodlords, and early enough that they can't get enough units to stop it without destroying their economy or completely stopping teching.
|
nerfs seem reasonable except the BC, seems like they are just relagating them to be shitty like carriers.
That said, reaper nerf needed to happen, 5 seconds to a bunker seems somewhat irrelevant, but tank change seems pretty huge, cause tanks arent great against immortals or ultras, so seems like a pretty huge nerf. but then again, it probably needed it.
I still think banelings should friend splash, just like all the AOE that other races have.
|
On August 28 2010 12:49 VanGarde wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2010 12:43 Spyridon wrote:On August 28 2010 12:40 VanGarde wrote:On August 28 2010 12:35 Spyridon wrote:On August 28 2010 12:34 VanGarde wrote:On August 28 2010 12:31 Spyridon wrote:On August 28 2010 12:27 VanGarde wrote:On August 28 2010 12:16 Spyridon wrote:On August 28 2010 12:11 HalfAmazing wrote:On August 28 2010 11:58 Grimjim wrote:
The BC nerf and Zealot is most likely because of the lower leagues.
Diamond is only the top 20% of players. The bottom 80% are probably playing the game by randomly smashing their heads against their keyboards, metaphorically of course. But the minute a Bronze league Terran learns that massing BCs is very powerful, or that a Protoss learns a two gate proxy is very difficult to stop, they are going to anger a ton of the opponents they face. The point is that Blizzard is catering to these noobs at our expense. We are rightfully outraged. I don't object to Terran getting nerfed, I object to the seemingly random manner in which they're going about doing so. The Marauder has been a problem since day one, and for some dark and inexplicable reason they choose to nerf everything but the Marauder. I'm convinced someone in a position of authority at Blizzard has been protecting it, keeping it safe from the evil nerfstick. That person probably worships a Marauder idol at night. He dances, and prances and sings to his Marauder effigy in a bizarre ritual. My explanation may disillusion you, but when only one logical explanation remains, no matter how uncomfortable, it must be accepted as truth. Blizzard does not balance around the "noobs". If you do not recognize the reasoning behind the nerfs, you are most likely the "noob". All of the issues discussed (aside from the BC change) I have seen discussed by multiple Pro players. They are pretty commonly recognized as existing. Tanks have never been the problem in TvZ, the midgame and lategame between terran and zerg have been relatively balanced. The main reason for the imbalance in the matchup has been the many ways that terran can harass and wreck havoc on zerg economy in the early game, that and slow mech death pushes. The latter does not really work anymore now that zerg players magically realized that you spread your mutas out agianst an anti air aoe unit. Nerfing the tanks is the opposite of what the matchups needs. The tank is not only the only unit which were not capable of harassing or abusing early game zerg in the first place, nerfing it and reducing its place in the mid/late game as a core unit will only fuel terrans to feel pressured to play even more abusive, with the lack of a strong backbone in the late game and the strength of zerg tier 3 you will just be even more motivated to try and harass the game to an end early on. TvZ was fine in late game, and imbalanced in the early game, so they go about it by nerfing the tank and the battlecruiser. The logic is lost on me. All races, not just Zerg, complained about tanks power mid-game. Look at the situation report... "Siege tanks in large numbers are performing too well in all matchups. In the mid- to late-game, siege tanks are too dominant against all ground units" I am sure a lot of people complained about tanks in mid-game. I know a lot of people were complaining about tanks performing too well in the mid- to late- game. That: A) Does not mean those people were right, and B) Does not mean that that was the reason that the matchup was imbalanced in the end. The fact that Blizzard statistically reviewed it, and did not rush the patch, and tested it to make sure it was the appropriate change before announcing it.... means that they WERE right! Yeah, because a battlecruiser nerf clearly shows that blizzard is right on track with dealing with the actual issues with possible imbalances  Who are you to decide if BC's are too strong against ground units? They have actual statistics and testing experience to decide if it is or not. Besides, if anything shows that they are on the right track with balance, it's their experience with Brood War. So your argument is, blizzard can't be wrong. Hence any arguments contrary to their reasoning is by default wrong? I suppose you never happened to study logical fallacies? Blizzard does bad balance changes all the time, they did several during the beta, and they have done several changes that they have later had to retract through new changes. They are not always correct. Also, the entire arugment, battlecruisers are too strong against ground units is one that is not by necessity something that requires balancing. The battlecruisers was not easily counterable by ground, however it was very counterable by air. There is in reality NO ground counter for broodlords, yet that does not mean that they need to be rebalanced.
They are taking a hell of a lot more time testing now that it's retail, compared to weekly changes in beta.
In contrast to your comments... So your argument is "their extensive testing was wrong because you said so"... even though your original comments mentions Mech and Tanks are an integral part of mech?
Also, normal harassment from Terran was not the real issue. It was abuses, reapers were the top one, and bunker harassment delaying the expansion in to tanks was the other. Both of these issues are being addressed.
How do you think you know the problem with the match better than Zerg players who have been dealing with it for months?
Regardless, are you still trying to argue that Tanks were not extremely effective against every single ground unit in the game? Zerg players who are scared to even use half of their ground units, and Protoss armies who have their Colossi w/ not even half of the kills of the Tanks even tho Tanks are cheaper, would disagree.
|
On August 28 2010 02:13 KingRajesh wrote:
Blizzard being Blizzard unfortunately, it's not the fact that siege tanks hit REALLY hard, it's the fact that you can make a line of them, and the corresponding splash damage plus them all firing at the same time destroys units. And also, what set of light, unarmored units do Zerg have to "perform better against siege tanks"? The Zergling?
Bunker build time needs to be 40 seconds IMO.
The Hydra will be able to get off more shots against the rest of the Terran army thanks to this nerf to the Siege tank. It will now take 3 shots from a Sieged tank to kill a hydra, down from 2. This allows the Hydra to get off more shots against the bio accompanying the siege support.
|
I wonder how long it's going to be before Reapers take more time to build than carriers. I mean, the problem is not that they can get out fast, it's just the amazing amount of damage they can do and how invulnerable they are to most Zerg units due to cliffjump speed building damage and range.
I still think banelings should friend splash, just like all the AOE that other races have.
Does the colossus splash?
|
On August 28 2010 12:53 CharlieMurphy wrote:
yea tbh, I think the tank is being slightly overnerfed. How many lings does 1 tank shot kill? What happens when the target ling has armor? etc
It kills the exact same number
It takes 2 shots when zlings get +1 carapace
|
On August 28 2010 12:54 Darpa wrote:
I still think banelings should friend splash, just like all the AOE that other races have.
Wouldn't that make them pretty useless? You shoot one and a whole pack of units dies immediately because of the chain reaction? They'd have to do a lot more damage so they could be used in fewer numbers, or have more armor, or something to balance that.
|
I agree with the tank change in principle but I think it was overkill. Maybe it should be 35 +20 instead of 35+15. If they're going to be bad vs. zealots (like in BW) they need to be as good against stalkers as they were against goons.
|
Not to throw a thorn in, but reading the post to me, says chat channels are coming soon maybe not this patch(not that i am happy about this). I mean wouldnt they make a big deal out of it considering how loud the community has been about it, instead of posting at the bottom of the announcement, "soon we will be rolling out chat rooms"?
|
On August 28 2010 13:04 therealmeal wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2010 12:54 Darpa wrote:
I still think banelings should friend splash, just like all the AOE that other races have. Wouldn't that make them pretty useless? You shoot one and a whole pack of units dies immediately because of the chain reaction? They'd have to do a lot more damage so they could be used in fewer numbers, or have more armor, or something to balance that.
Banelings could be made immune to their own acid splash.
|
Yea I definately think siege tanks should have the bonus to 60 damage like they were before, this would be awesome since it would effectively eliminate heavy stalker collosus from tvp. Zealot, immortal, HT was always cooler to watch imo anyways.
|
This is really annoying. They keep nerfing P. Like wtf. and yet useless units like the MS and carrier remain unchanged
|
On August 28 2010 12:57 Spyridon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2010 12:49 VanGarde wrote:On August 28 2010 12:43 Spyridon wrote:On August 28 2010 12:40 VanGarde wrote:On August 28 2010 12:35 Spyridon wrote:On August 28 2010 12:34 VanGarde wrote:On August 28 2010 12:31 Spyridon wrote:On August 28 2010 12:27 VanGarde wrote:On August 28 2010 12:16 Spyridon wrote:On August 28 2010 12:11 HalfAmazing wrote:[quote] The point is that Blizzard is catering to these noobs at our expense. We are rightfully outraged. I don't object to Terran getting nerfed, I object to the seemingly random manner in which they're going about doing so. The Marauder has been a problem since day one, and for some dark and inexplicable reason they choose to nerf everything but the Marauder. I'm convinced someone in a position of authority at Blizzard has been protecting it, keeping it safe from the evil nerfstick. That person probably worships a Marauder idol at night. He dances, and prances and sings to his Marauder effigy in a bizarre ritual. My explanation may disillusion you, but when only one logical explanation remains, no matter how uncomfortable, it must be accepted as truth. Blizzard does not balance around the "noobs". If you do not recognize the reasoning behind the nerfs, you are most likely the "noob". All of the issues discussed (aside from the BC change) I have seen discussed by multiple Pro players. They are pretty commonly recognized as existing. Tanks have never been the problem in TvZ, the midgame and lategame between terran and zerg have been relatively balanced. The main reason for the imbalance in the matchup has been the many ways that terran can harass and wreck havoc on zerg economy in the early game, that and slow mech death pushes. The latter does not really work anymore now that zerg players magically realized that you spread your mutas out agianst an anti air aoe unit. Nerfing the tanks is the opposite of what the matchups needs. The tank is not only the only unit which were not capable of harassing or abusing early game zerg in the first place, nerfing it and reducing its place in the mid/late game as a core unit will only fuel terrans to feel pressured to play even more abusive, with the lack of a strong backbone in the late game and the strength of zerg tier 3 you will just be even more motivated to try and harass the game to an end early on. TvZ was fine in late game, and imbalanced in the early game, so they go about it by nerfing the tank and the battlecruiser. The logic is lost on me. All races, not just Zerg, complained about tanks power mid-game. Look at the situation report... "Siege tanks in large numbers are performing too well in all matchups. In the mid- to late-game, siege tanks are too dominant against all ground units" I am sure a lot of people complained about tanks in mid-game. I know a lot of people were complaining about tanks performing too well in the mid- to late- game. That: A) Does not mean those people were right, and B) Does not mean that that was the reason that the matchup was imbalanced in the end. The fact that Blizzard statistically reviewed it, and did not rush the patch, and tested it to make sure it was the appropriate change before announcing it.... means that they WERE right! Yeah, because a battlecruiser nerf clearly shows that blizzard is right on track with dealing with the actual issues with possible imbalances Who are you to decide if BC's are too strong against ground units? They have actual statistics and testing experience to decide if it is or not. Besides, if anything shows that they are on the right track with balance, it's their experience with Brood War. So your argument is, blizzard can't be wrong. Hence any arguments contrary to their reasoning is by default wrong? I suppose you never happened to study logical fallacies? Blizzard does bad balance changes all the time, they did several during the beta, and they have done several changes that they have later had to retract through new changes. They are not always correct. Also, the entire arugment, battlecruisers are too strong against ground units is one that is not by necessity something that requires balancing. The battlecruisers was not easily counterable by ground, however it was very counterable by air. There is in reality NO ground counter for broodlords, yet that does not mean that they need to be rebalanced. They are taking a hell of a lot more time testing now that it's retail, compared to weekly changes in beta. In contrast to your comments... So your argument is "their extensive testing was wrong because you said so"... even though your original comments mentions Mech and Tanks are an integral part of mech? Also, normal harassment from Terran was not the real issue. It was abuses, reapers were the top one, and bunker harassment delaying the expansion in to tanks was the other. Both of these issues are being addressed. How do you think you know the problem with the match better than Zerg players who have been dealing with it for months? Regardless, are you still trying to argue that Tanks were not extremely effective against every single ground unit in the game? Zerg players who are scared to even use half of their ground units, and Protoss armies who have their Colossi w/ not even half of the kills of the Tanks even tho Tanks are cheaper, would disagree.
Why does every single one of your arguments boil down to "So you think you know better than x?"
I am actually relaying what I hear from high level zergs which is that the problem is and has always been terran early aggression and flexible harassing. I am relaying that information because as a terran player I can also verify that this is a problem.
Do I deny that tanks are extremely effective against every single ground unit in the game. I wouldn't go as far as to say in the game. Marauder have slowly taken over in TvT because people realized that as long as you play aggressively and keep tank numbers down, marauders rape tanks.
Tanks have been very effective in TvZ and I would argue that they actually HAD to be. Unless you nerf banelings, then bio without tanks is not even viable in TvZ. I reserve final opinion until I can test it but it seems to me that 15 damage reduction. Which is a hell of a lot, might be too much to retain this balance. The tank has kept bio in the game against zerg, if it can't deal with banelings then you tell me how the matchup should be played.
I just don't get why the tank is nerfed against everything except armored units, when people are only using the tank to deal with NON armored units. If I want to deal with armored units I get marauders.
|
On August 28 2010 13:07 BondGamer wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2010 13:04 therealmeal wrote:On August 28 2010 12:54 Darpa wrote:
I still think banelings should friend splash, just like all the AOE that other races have. Wouldn't that make them pretty useless? You shoot one and a whole pack of units dies immediately because of the chain reaction? They'd have to do a lot more damage so they could be used in fewer numbers, or have more armor, or something to balance that. Banelings could be made immune to their own acid splash.
That would help.
Is anyone actually excited about getting 3D support?
|
the nerfs are well welcomed by me, im a zerg player though and i feel that the ultra nerf is annoying but we'll survive. perhaps the zealot build time will perhaps deter people from proxy 2 gating all the time. though im surprised nothing was done about carrier or mothership.
the terran reaper nerf, well 5 seconds will not reduce its effectiveness. ther problem with reapers is that mass T players gets that slaughters everything that comes. the bunker time increase well. its deserved. if they can build something for free it should at least take a little while longer. the battlecruiser is proberly to account for low level players or those who play team games.
but the tank nerf is what surprised me the most. ive read many posts of people already QQing about how they are gonna be weak as piss now. though i have to ask them, you whine after the longest ranged unit in the game cant one hit KO everything now?
it'll make hydras usefull again. meaning in the zvt matchup in T comes on creep they have to watch for zerglings using up the tanks shots, then hydras coming in quick to clean up due to fast movement on creep. and it'll make terran players feel less safe on the ground and have to actually pay attention to their army in stead of sieging up then going back to playing sim city in their base.
though the map change is appauling. one thing changed to desert oasis(which i thumbs down any way ha ha) and everyother map is left alone?? hmm smart move right there?
oh well post over we shal see what comes of these changes ingame. though hopefully with the patch SEA users will be able to connect to NA server finally. seems logical
|
Blizzard... just add overshooting and reduce the fire-rate of the tank. Problem solved.
|
I don't understand the zealot nerf.. sure more build time from the gateway will give more breathing room for zergs early game, and that is good, so np with that.. now, why increase the warpgate cooldown? it will majorly affect toss midgame, if you're trying to make korean 4warpgates less powerfull, it is the warping time that should be increased, not the warpgate cooldown.
On another note, reaper +5 seconds, does that mean that I can make gateway-core-stalker with no zealot and be safe?
and where is my stimed marauder nerf ? =(
|
On August 28 2010 13:20 sluggaslamoo wrote:
Blizzard... just add overshooting and reduce the fire-rate of the tank. Problem solved.
I don't get all these "balance x unit THIS way and not THIS way" comments. If it becomes balanced, why exactly does it matter? Seems kind of like you just want it to work the same way as it did in BW.
|
On August 28 2010 12:53 Newguy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2010 12:34 VanGarde wrote:On August 28 2010 12:31 Spyridon wrote:On August 28 2010 12:27 VanGarde wrote:On August 28 2010 12:16 Spyridon wrote:On August 28 2010 12:11 HalfAmazing wrote:On August 28 2010 11:58 Grimjim wrote:
The BC nerf and Zealot is most likely because of the lower leagues.
Diamond is only the top 20% of players. The bottom 80% are probably playing the game by randomly smashing their heads against their keyboards, metaphorically of course. But the minute a Bronze league Terran learns that massing BCs is very powerful, or that a Protoss learns a two gate proxy is very difficult to stop, they are going to anger a ton of the opponents they face. The point is that Blizzard is catering to these noobs at our expense. We are rightfully outraged. I don't object to Terran getting nerfed, I object to the seemingly random manner in which they're going about doing so. The Marauder has been a problem since day one, and for some dark and inexplicable reason they choose to nerf everything but the Marauder. I'm convinced someone in a position of authority at Blizzard has been protecting it, keeping it safe from the evil nerfstick. That person probably worships a Marauder idol at night. He dances, and prances and sings to his Marauder effigy in a bizarre ritual. My explanation may disillusion you, but when only one logical explanation remains, no matter how uncomfortable, it must be accepted as truth. Blizzard does not balance around the "noobs". If you do not recognize the reasoning behind the nerfs, you are most likely the "noob". All of the issues discussed (aside from the BC change) I have seen discussed by multiple Pro players. They are pretty commonly recognized as existing. Tanks have never been the problem in TvZ, the midgame and lategame between terran and zerg have been relatively balanced. The main reason for the imbalance in the matchup has been the many ways that terran can harass and wreck havoc on zerg economy in the early game, that and slow mech death pushes. The latter does not really work anymore now that zerg players magically realized that you spread your mutas out agianst an anti air aoe unit. Nerfing the tanks is the opposite of what the matchups needs. The tank is not only the only unit which were not capable of harassing or abusing early game zerg in the first place, nerfing it and reducing its place in the mid/late game as a core unit will only fuel terrans to feel pressured to play even more abusive, with the lack of a strong backbone in the late game and the strength of zerg tier 3 you will just be even more motivated to try and harass the game to an end early on. TvZ was fine in late game, and imbalanced in the early game, so they go about it by nerfing the tank and the battlecruiser. The logic is lost on me. All races, not just Zerg, complained about tanks power mid-game. Look at the situation report... "Siege tanks in large numbers are performing too well in all matchups. In the mid- to late-game, siege tanks are too dominant against all ground units" I am sure a lot of people complained about tanks in mid-game. I know a lot of people were complaining about tanks performing too well in the mid- to late- game. That: A) Does not mean those people were right, and B) Does not mean that that was the reason that the matchup was imbalanced in the end. I'm pretty sure blizzard is balancing heavily based on the top Korean players, as well as some of the other top players. If you have watched some of the Korean starcraft 2 clan wars, you would know how often zerg is killed with a fast mid-game tank push, before they can tech high enough to get ultras or broodlords, and early enough that they can't get enough units to stop it without destroying their economy or completely stopping teching.
Do you have any replays or links to these games?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
