|
On August 28 2010 14:46 Crisium wrote:
Battlecruiser nerf blows my mind. 20% DPS decrease in unbelievably huge. A unit that takes so long to tech to should be slightly more cost effective than Tier 1.5 (Stalker) or Tier 2 (Hydra) units. How often do you see BC's in professional play (tournaments) so far? TLO and maybe a couple others against Protoss very rarely. This change must have been based on low level play. This is one of the worst things Blizzard has done. Already marginal units should not be nerfed into oblivion.
Why should Tier 3.5 units not be more cost effective than 1.5-2? It is only logical, lest there be no incentive to tech. I would love for someone to calculate the changes in the amount of Stalkers / Hydras to take down a BC from before to after, and calculate the cost. If the BC cost is equal or god-forbid more expensive, then Blizzard truly is lost.
Dude, they are cost effective vs every unit. Try it in the unit tester w/ yamato cannon research. Try like 4 BC vs equal amount of Hydras. They can kill over double the resource amounts of Hydras as long as you research Yamato. They have no counters from Zerg aside from Corruptors (infestors blow on them, watch Idra attempt NP on them vs TLO in KOTB) and even Corr get torn up by Yamato due to how they stack.
The reason you dont see them is because Terran mid-game is so strong they just stop teching up. Not because of their strength.
|
On August 28 2010 15:32 Grond wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2010 13:11 VanGarde wrote:
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. Maybe this is in preparation for removing the armored damage bonus from marauders, Tanks will not have a bonus vs armor in regular mode and siege mode. Many people feel the Marauder bonus vs armor is the most broken aspect of the game.
I'm not even sure where the marauder vs armor bonus came from, I mean if you use the crude fundamental idea that the marauder/hellion relationship is a weapon switch from firebat/vulture it sorta seems like they threw it in because "bio would be too weak against mech and armor without it".
A lazy suggestion is to make the armor bonus an upgrade since the tears really seem to flow during the early/midgame, but then im not smart or good enough to make any suggestions as to how to balance the "another thing i have to remember to get" vs cost vs obscurity in the tech tree.
Really though the marauder is a pretty huge problem and imo (for example) the real reason 5 rax reaper seems so strong ie. redefining "transition" to mean "oh im pressing d instead of r now".
|
Its exactly how it is in BW now. siege tanks do half damage to zealots in sc1 70 -> 35dmg, and now they do 50 -> 35 damage in sc2.
Untrue. In BW shields took full damage from everything; 1 round from a sieged tank would completely drain the Zealots shields. In SC2 1 shot from a sieged tank will leave the Zealot with 15 shields.
I would also site this as a reason that the Archon in SC2 has actually gotten a fairly substantial buff... assuming there are no ghosts, of course.
|
On August 28 2010 02:11 ]Grey[ wrote:
These all seem like pretty solid changes. Their reasoning for the zealot change is a bit odd though. Were proxy gateways particularly hard to hold off as Terran? They seemed pretty ineffective against Zerg, from my experience, at least.
Because every zerg goes 14 pool+speed in advance knowing that a fast 2 gate is almost an automatic loss. This should make it possible to 14 hatch more. 14 hatch has a chance vs 2 gate only on a few maps.
I suspect the hydralisk will return against terran with siege tank change. Ultras needed the nerf and I'm pleasantly surprised with the changes.
|
On August 28 2010 16:15 Antimage wrote:
Still nothing to help combat the popular 2 player map tvp 6 rax/7rax marine/bunker cheese... =/ even worse, zealot build speed is nerfed so it's harder to counter it.
Pretty sure the counter is scouting. I doubt you'll get that in a patch though...
|
United States47024 Posts
On August 28 2010 16:42 Drowsy wrote:
Because every zerg goes 14 pool+speed in advance knowing that a fast 2 gate is almost an automatic loss. This should make it possible to 14 hatch more. 14 hatch has a chance vs 2 gate only on a few maps.
This is the real benefit of the reaper/bunker/zealot/gateway nerfs.
2gate is strong not because it always kills the zerg, but because it basically eliminates hatch-first from the list of viable openings. Huge contrast to SC1 where hatch-first was actually *better* at holding 2gate than pool-first.
|
Germany2762 Posts
I dont really get the zealot and ultralisk changes... The stuff they plan for terran sounds good though.
|
When will you realize that the Marauder is the core of every terran build's army. If you nerf the Marauders terran becomes total trash, now even with the mech overkill...
Oh and the BC has now become a very expensive flying marine LoL
|
I kinda miss some kind of carrier buff to make toss have more viable lategame options. I am also a little bit undecided about the terran nerfs. They all seem very reasonable but bio-armies are still pretty strong. I don't know if mmm actually needs a nerf so maybe someone could comment on this?
Zealot nerf seems okay to me too. I am really sick of mass zealot 2gate lameness. It just doesnt help to improve in the game.
|
On August 28 2010 13:59 Rampager wrote:
I think we're missing the most important aspect of this soon-to-be patch. The last level of the campaign on brutal difficulty is going to get significantly harder.
Patch notes look pretty good, although I'm now more afraid of zerg early pressure then ever (<-- P Player), Personally I would've decreased the effectiveness of stim on Marauders slightly but little changes are nice.
I wonder if we'll see this patch applied before the conclusion of any major tournaments (I'm thinking GSL).
So you did not find it even a little bit suspicious that tanks have 150 hp and 60 damage in single player, while having 160 hp and 50 damage in multiplayer?
|
So you did not find it even a little bit suspicious that tanks have 150 hp and 60 damage in single player, while having 160 hp and 50 damage in multiplayer?
Yeah, and Corruptors can still shut down buildings 
|
These all seem like pretty great changes. I think it's going to fix a lot of the issues w/ diversity of strategies in ZvT
|
On August 28 2010 16:15 Spyridon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2010 14:46 Crisium wrote:
Battlecruiser nerf blows my mind. 20% DPS decrease in unbelievably huge. A unit that takes so long to tech to should be slightly more cost effective than Tier 1.5 (Stalker) or Tier 2 (Hydra) units. How often do you see BC's in professional play (tournaments) so far? TLO and maybe a couple others against Protoss very rarely. This change must have been based on low level play. This is one of the worst things Blizzard has done. Already marginal units should not be nerfed into oblivion.
Why should Tier 3.5 units not be more cost effective than 1.5-2? It is only logical, lest there be no incentive to tech. I would love for someone to calculate the changes in the amount of Stalkers / Hydras to take down a BC from before to after, and calculate the cost. If the BC cost is equal or god-forbid more expensive, then Blizzard truly is lost. Dude, they are cost effective vs every unit. Try it in the unit tester w/ yamato cannon research. Try like 4 BC vs equal amount of Hydras. They can kill over double the resource amounts of Hydras as long as you research Yamato. They have no counters from Zerg aside from Corruptors (infestors blow on them, watch Idra attempt NP on them vs TLO in KOTB) and even Corr get torn up by Yamato due to how they stack.The reason you dont see them is because Terran mid-game is so strong they just stop teching up. Not because of their strength.
Yamato does not deal splash damage, it's completely irrelevant if the units are stacked or not.
|
On August 28 2010 17:09 lololol wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2010 13:59 Rampager wrote:
I think we're missing the most important aspect of this soon-to-be patch. The last level of the campaign on brutal difficulty is going to get significantly harder.
Patch notes look pretty good, although I'm now more afraid of zerg early pressure then ever (<-- P Player), Personally I would've decreased the effectiveness of stim on Marauders slightly but little changes are nice.
I wonder if we'll see this patch applied before the conclusion of any major tournaments (I'm thinking GSL). So you did not find it even a little bit suspicious that tanks have 150 hp and 60 damage in single player, while having 160 hp and 50 damage in multiplayer?
For the record, campaign units are left unchanged by multiplayer balance patches, presumably so that all of the campaigns remain at the intended difficulty levels.
|
Dam they keep nerfing tanks  Now it cant even one shot workers
|
I hate to imagine it but, with the added time to the zealots, just how effective would a 6-pool be against a protoss? I am not complaining about the change or anything. I am legitimately curious what a 6-pool would be like against a protoss now.
Yes, there is a possibility of walling off, but not all maps have ramps that would allow for that. I do like the added time for the reapers. This will alleviate the consistent reaper rushes I see. I will have to compare it to the typing of getting out the first stalker (with various builds such as 10 or 12gate to assimilation/18 core).I wan to see the final list because this bit, creating lists of features and bugs to address in future patches really worries me. Makes me wonder just how many of the bugs they will be fixing mid Semester, like infestor/portraits/achievements, and a bunch of other bugs.
What makes me sad is that, I do not really say anything changing for the Zerg. A lot of the complaints zerg had have yet to be addressed and clearly from the notes we see now, Blizzard is not working on helping zerg players out. A part of me wishes this was still beta, because at least with beta, we could get adjustments and changes to units quickly and not have to wait a month, two, or more. Zerg just does not feel complete to me :-/
|
I've seen a lot of PvX replays lately, but can't remember seeing early Zealots dominating in any other matchup than PvP.
Other than that, good patch I guess.
|
Excellent Patch, can't wait!
Ultra Buff is quite huge (removing building attack and letting it do aoe against buildings too).
Tank nerf enables Zerg to play Hydras (and even Lings if you have more armor upgrades than the terran vehicle attack) against Terran effectively too and thus gives them another build option (thats quite safe) and a strong timing attack.
Reaper and Zealot build time nerf seems pretty reasonable too.
Can't really understand the BC nerf though....
|
6-pool is still ineffective because you can wall off with frickin probes - you don't even need a fast zealot to hold it off
still I can't believe blizzard is doing this to the game; they screwed up in warcraft 3, but chaning the fundamentals of protoss' early game just because some noobs lose against other noobs who go fast-zealots is beyond me
but then again blizzard balances the game for bronze/silver 3v3 where it's obvious that one player going 6 factory mass-siege-tanks will own
|
On August 28 2010 19:29 sleepingdog wrote:
6-pool is still ineffective because you can wall off with frickin probes - you don't even need a fast zealot to hold it off
still I can't believe blizzard is doing this to the game; they screwed up in warcraft 3, but chaning the fundamentals of protoss' early game just because some noobs lose against other noobs who go fast-zealots is beyond me
but then again blizzard balances the game for bronze/silver 3v3 where it's obvious that one player going 6 factory mass-siege-tanks will own
What about on scrapstation? Walling off wont cut it, and you would have take off the majority of your probes off the line if you wanted to walloff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
