|
On August 28 2010 22:58 esperanto wrote:
Correct me if i am wrong, but with these changes i highly doubt, that its possible for a 12/13gate protoss player to get a zealot out (and wall off the ramp) before the initial early pool zearglings run in.
I kinda know what every Zerg player will do in PvZ in gold/plat league now.
Its a nice change from the endless 2gating protoss and 4gate follow ups no? ^^.
Sorry to be a nag but for each match up to be fun both sides have to be able to pressure the opponent in any stage of the game, early, mid and late.
In PvZ. Protoss had a lot of initiative. 2 gates, proxy 2 gates, 4 gates, stargate opening...
Whereas zerg only had 6-10 pool, which is a complete and utter all in compared to 2 gate or 4 gate. And a roach push, which was even sillier due to stalkers being able to kite them all day long.
These extra 5 seconds won't matter that much, given that chrono'd it would be reduced to about 3 seconds. If all those probes, which can make pylons at the front to block the ramp off, are not able to fend off an all in rush, then it would be problematic. But I hardly feel as if those 5 (3) seconds will lose you the game right there.
|
On August 28 2010 23:10 Grummler wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2010 21:26 Izzachar wrote:
Marauders are cost effective vs hydras and thats even without stim...
With stim marauders pwn hydras hard.
I fear that this matchup will become one sided as terran dominates the early game, while zerg dominates later on. So either the terran wins straight away, or loses on the long run. * Source: unit test map 1.4
exactly my thoughts.
mid/lategame zvt is no problem. while T got HUGE nerfs mid/late game.
the tank change might destroy the matchup and change gameplay diversity/dynamics in all matchups to the worse.
|
On August 28 2010 22:19 Highwind wrote:
rapid fire tickle ship
Pure gold. You win thread sir.
On topic: The zealot build time will become a serious obstacle to dealing with most cheeses, broken? idk.
What's really going to suck is how much help T will get vs P early game....when they already had a slight advantage.
I really do hope they tested the build time in many scenarios.
A slight fix to marauders sounds like the best possible change I can think of.
It will be interesting to see what else is done in 1.1.
|
It's awesome how angry the bronze-silver T's are getting because they can't spam tanks/thors and win TvZ anymore :3
|
On August 28 2010 23:16 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2010 23:10 Grummler wrote:On August 28 2010 21:26 Izzachar wrote:
Marauders are cost effective vs hydras and thats even without stim...
With stim marauders pwn hydras hard.
I fear that this matchup will become one sided as terran dominates the early game, while zerg dominates later on. So either the terran wins straight away, or loses on the long run. * Source: unit test map 1.4 exactly my thoughts. mid/lategame zvt is no problem. while T got HUGE nerfs mid/late game. the tank change might destroy the matchup and change gameplay diversity/dynamics in all matchups to the worse.
hm those tears taste so good... (just wait till the patch is released, b4 whining :/)
BTT:
I hope they tweak the roacha little, because now a hydra takes as many Tank shots as a roach, so I think we will see even fewer Roaches. (not that I'm complaining, its cool with me - I'd rather produce hydras than roaches, but just saying ...)
|
edit: shit wrong thread haha
|
Why no archon buff =(?Archons are the coolest unit ever
|
+ Show Spoiler + On August 28 2010 06:33 PKCarwash wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2010 06:20 crazeman wrote:On August 28 2010 06:11 PKCarwash wrote:
I wish they had gone a different route when balancing the races...they seem to have the "nerf each race until they are all balanced" mindset
If they think tanks BC's and reapers are too powerful, then they should have buffed P and Z up to T's standards, not nerf everything IMO
anyways now my wallin in PvZ is going to take 10 more seconds to be zergling tight... =\... yay
but at least those OP OP ultras got a nerf (/sarcasm) That's just stupid, if one unit is too powerful, you'll rather buff 15 other units rather than nerfing the one unit? The balance of the game is so delicate, that buffing every other unit will definitely cause more unforeseen balance problems than nerfing one unit. come on now, listen to yourself, you arent that stupid I didnt say "reapers are OP so buff every other unit in the game" that would be ridiculous I'm saying there are other ways other than nerfing the reapers to fix the problems they cause in the early game. Show nested quote +On August 28 2010 06:24 bobcat wrote:
By that logic the game would become heavily imbalance very quickly. If you lower the spawn time of stalkers to make them counter reapers more easily, then you make stalkers too powerful against all other forms of warfare.
The only way to make zealots stronger against tanks would be to give them at least 20 more shield, which would make zealots too powerful.
Then you have to buff lings roaches and hydras to counter protosses heavily improved tier 1.5 game and it spirals out of control from there.
The only time blizz will buff a unit, is when the unit being too weak is the problem. If another unit is too strong it makes far more sense to augment that ONE unit than it does to change the entire game to fit that one units imbalance.
did I say decrease stalker spawn? did I SAY give zeals more shields? no. you are making things up there are more attributes units have than just spawn time and damage. speed, range, upgrades, hp, damage, shields, cost, spawn time, and the list goes on. SOMETHING can be changed to solve the problems in place, without always nerfing when people QQ about something Nerfing also leads to that slippery slope of balance changed. oops we nerfed T, now P its too good, so they nerf P, but then Z is too good, so nerf nerf nerf nerf nerf, its the same thing as you are saying. and I'm not saying nerfs are NEVER the answer, because quite frankly sometimes something is just too good, and the best way to change it is to nerf the HELL out of it, but I see zero, ZERO buffs in this patch, so it looks to me like they are jsut going to fall into this "spiral" as you put it, if they continue along this road
It's called an example homeslice. Like when someone (you) says
"If they think tanks BC's and reapers are too powerful, then they should have buffed P and Z up to T's standards, not nerf everything IMO"
Since you fail to present a logical arguement or give any examples yourself of how something like your suggestiong would work, it is up to me to create a scenario for you. Did you say make stalkers faster or give zeals more health? No. You went with everyone's favorite nebulous word "buff". Furthermore you said "buff up to T's standards". Now a logic man would think that by combatting a unit whose main issue is the speed with which it is produced, that the counter-buff for zerg and toss would be for either of them to build their counter unit(stalker) more quickly.
But it doesn't matter what kind of "buff" they use to make the P and Z up to standard "spawn time and damage. speed, range, upgrades, hp, damage(again), shields(kinda falls under hp), cost, spawn time( i think you already covered this one too)", because increasing ANY stat of a unit increases that units power against ALL units. As a result, ALL other units T, P and Z must be looked at again to see if how the buff to one unit makes their usefulness change. Is this unit as good against that unit? Ok how about this one? So on and so forth.
My point (and you would have gotten this if you actually bothered to read my entire post) was that choosing to not nerf a unit that needs a nerf and instead opting to increase the power of many other units to counter that one unit's imbalance will cause a tectonic shift in the games balance as a result of blizzard trying to change that many units.
Vice versa, when a unit needs to be buffed, like ultralisks did, it is much easier to buff the ultralisk then it is to nerf all of the other units that it comes into contact with.
That is the point of the word balance. It is about making each unit have a specific value and trying to keep them in balance with eachother.
"Nerfing also leads to that slippery slope of balance changed. oops we nerfed T, now P its too good, so they nerf P, but then Z is too good, so nerf nerf nerf nerf nerf, its the same thing as you are saying."
Once again, I have to disagree with you.
Point #1: I have never seen Blizzard ever say "Ok guys we're going to nerf Protoss because we think that, as a designer, we completely failed to make even a single Protoss unit that was on the same level of the other races." Usually its more along the lines of oh I don't know.....
"1Siege tanks in large numbers are performing too well in all matchups. In the mid- to late-game, siege tanks are 2too dominant against all ground units. 3We want a small set of light and unarmored ground units to perform better against siege tanks. 4With this in mind, we're changing the Siege Mode damage of the siege tank from 50 to 35, +15 vs. armored; to correspond with this, damage upgrades will be changed from +5 to +3, +2 vs. armored. This change reduces the base damage of the siege tank against light and unarmored units, as well as the splash damage."
Right there!
1. They selected a specific unit.
2. They explained why they felt that it was creating an imbalance.
3. They explained how they think think should work ideally.
4. They used the justification in 3 to introduce the nerf.
Point #2
Nerfing a siege tank does not make P or Z more powerful. It makes a specific terran unit weaker and thus most strategies attached to that unit become weaker as a result. However, MMM is no weaker from these nerfs, neither is Bio Ball, Proxy marauders. The point of nerfing tanks is (now this one is a hard pill to swallow at first but it is ultimately true) to make the game fun for all of the races. Without tanks being such a severe counter to any large group of early tier units it forces the terran player to do a bit more scouting and be a bit more creative/varied in their ground defense. It also makes builds like 1-1-1 where a T player can instantly access tier 3 a bit more of a risk as it can more easily be punished by a large group of zealots or hydras. It in turn allows proto/zerg players to have more options for how to attack their opponent which is more fun for them.
Another example would be early game PvP, while I can win 95% of my PvP games by going 10 gate zealot boost, I find that the tactic bores me to tears. Since I play SC for fun and thought provoking competiton I dont persue this strategy every game. By nerfing the zealot spawn time, it allows room for other options to evolve from the mix thus making the game more interesting and *gasp* STRATEGIC!
In closing, there is a time to nerf, and a time to buff, and to think that they should buff more or less or nerf less or more is to say only that you misunderstand the buffing and nerfing process.
If you want to disagree with me thats fine, but please disagree with the arguement and not a small fragment of what I said or how I said it.
|
I fail to see how T will suddenly be at some massive disadvantage vs Z late game.
Tanks will be less effective against three zerg ground units: lings banelings and hydras. Hellions roast all three and hydras will still be mediocre at best vs a decent number of tanks because of their slow move speed, limited range and low health. Not to mention the marines and thors supporting the tanks.
Tanks will be just as effective against roaches and ultras. Ultras who will now be doing less damage in return.
Battlecruisers have been nerfed, but are a poor choice against Z anyway since by the point in the game that they're available the Zerg will inevitably have a spire to produce corrupters, and the resources/hatcheries to make a lot of them very quickly.
|
On August 28 2010 23:10 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2010 22:56 Noocta wrote:On August 28 2010 21:51 L0thar wrote:
Terrible patch overall, all they had to do was buff zerg early game and nerf ultralisk, but instead we got this. Maybe I'm overreacting, but better be pissed now and pleasantly surprised later than be hopefull at first and than terribly dissapointed. That's pretty much all they do here.. And it's funny to see terran players cry about banelings.. Afraid because u will have to micro your "bioball 1a" a little ? :| its funny how insanely biased guys taunt out of their rage. fact is the only counter to banelings are tanks. not only is micro to be somewhat cost effective vs banelings VERY hard to impossible ( mm vs lurker micro was a breeze compared) but also can all micro be shut down by fungal. think before writing . Show nested quote +On August 28 2010 23:08 Perkins1752 wrote:
lol @ people saying hydras will be vailable in ZvT. They kill banshees, after patch mabye BC's but every Terran ground unit is tearing them apart. plain wrong. hydras beat evrything T on ground except for healed mass rines or tanks. tanks deal 30% dmg less which might (we'll see) be enough for hydra/lings to get a huge boost in tvz.
LOL how about counter ur banelings with MARAUDERS. use the MARAUDERS TO TANK THEM. ya, more than 1 control group bro, ull be ok. you guys are so bad.
|
On August 28 2010 23:24 StormWeapon wrote:Pure gold. You win thread sir. On topic: The zealot build time will become a serious obstacle to dealing with most cheeses, broken? idk. What's really going to suck is how much help T will get vs P early game....when they already had a slight advantage. I really do hope they tested the build time in many scenarios. A slight fix to marauders sounds like the best possible change I can think of. It will be interesting to see what else is done in 1.1.
I hope you wow players burn in hell and get raped by satan.
User was warned for this post
|
From a Terran-- good changes overall. I like.
|
On August 28 2010 23:49 crappen wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2010 23:24 StormWeapon wrote:On August 28 2010 22:19 Highwind wrote:
rapid fire tickle ship
Pure gold. You win thread sir. On topic: The zealot build time will become a serious obstacle to dealing with most cheeses, broken? idk. What's really going to suck is how much help T will get vs P early game....when they already had a slight advantage. I really do hope they tested the build time in many scenarios. A slight fix to marauders sounds like the best possible change I can think of. It will be interesting to see what else is done in 1.1. I hope you wow players burn in hell and get raped by satan.
stfu
User was warned for this post
|
On August 28 2010 22:17 rockslave wrote:
This patch is huge.
TvT is gonna be fun! Maybe I'll even play T again.
Can youexplain whats so fun about marauder 1a stim play? For me it's boring. Guess I will have to start going the boring MMM again against toss =(.
|
Reaper Build time change :
Your first reaper will be build exactly 5 sec later. Each zerg larva spawns in 13 sec. And queen larva mechanics is 40 sec/4 larva. Combined larva spawn time is 6.5 sec if perfectly microed. Guess what when your first reaper arrives zerg will have nothing extra.
Lets say you decided to attack with 6.If you assume its 30 secs later then the usual attack time you are wrong. I highly doubt anyone will produce those from a single barracks. It will most likely be 10-15 sec later then usual timing. Poor zerg will have 2 extra larvas spawned and these 2 larvas will produce 1 extra unit. And that one extra unit magically will end the inbalance the reapers are.A unit that can kite/outrange others , can jump off and on cliffs cant be balanced by simply adding 5 secs on build time. This unit needs a complete redesign.
Tank Nerf :
The nerf only effects zealots and hydras . They still one shot lings and banelings. The splash dmg still does 100% dmg to closely packed lings and banelings so no extra banelings or lings survive. The collision size of lings and banelings are in 100% splash range.
You might argue +1 armored lings would survive . Armor upgrade is +1 on lings. Weapon Upgrade on tanks is +2 per lvl. This is only true in 1/0 or 3/1 cases.
5 Sec Bunker Build time delay :
I yet to to see a bunker rush where the units actually arrive earlier then the bunker. This will have no effect on game play.
The only dramatic change is the nerf on zealots/warp gates. It will change PvZ early game for sure. . And zealots will actually be useful in PvT against the tanks .Other changes will have no effect at all
|
didnt they just nerf zealot build time
|
On August 28 2010 23:57 sux2bu wrote:
Reaper Build time change :
Your first reaper will be build exactly 5 sec later. Each zerg larva spawns in 13 sec. And queen larva mechanics is 40 sec/4 larva. Combined larva spawn time is 6.5 sec if perfectly microed. Guess what when your first reaper arrives zerg will have nothing extra.
Lets say you decided to attack with 6.If you assume its 30 secs later then the usual attack time you are wrong. I highly doubt anyone will produce those from a single barracks. It will most likely be 10-15 sec later then usual timing. Poor zerg will have 2 extra larvas spawned and these 2 larvas will produce 1 extra unit. And that one extra unit magically will end the inbalance the reapers are.A unit that can kite/outrange others , can jump off and on cliffs cant be balanced by simply adding 5 secs on build time. This unit needs a complete redesign.
Tank Nerf :
The nerf only effects zealots and hydras . They still one shot lings and banelings. The splash dmg still does 100% dmg to closely packed lings and banelings so no extra banelings or lings survive. The collision size of lings and banelings are in 100% splash range.
You might argue +1 armored lings would survive . Armor upgrade is +1 on lings. Weapon Upgrade on tanks is +2 per lvl. This is only true in 1/0 or 3/1 cases.
5 Sec Bunker Build time delay :
I yet to to see a bunker rush where the units actually arrive earlier then the bunker. This will have no effect on game play.
The only dramatic change is the nerf on zealots/warp gates. It will change PvZ early game for sure. . And zealots will actually be useful in PvT against the tanks .Other changes will have no effect at all
Exactly terran will get benefit in the end in pvt , good luck getting zealots in tank range through marauders , early 2 marine marauder pushes and 6-9 pools will be rly hard to counter and in end game ultra nerf will hurt much more than tank nerf the tvz
|
Coming from a protoss player I would just like to point out something that I find funny.
Every single toss complainer here is talking about how a 5 second build time will kill their zealot play like a swarm of firebats, but then they are turning around and saying that a HUGE siege tank debuff wont really make a difference......
I played toss in the beta, so first of all I should say that this debuff is more than I ever hoped we would get as toss so Hooray for that. Second of all, the PvT game isn't that bad right now and a 5 second addition to zealots isn't going to change it. Build another gatway.
|
On August 29 2010 00:10 st3roids wrote:Exactly terran will get benefit in the end in pvt , good luck getting zealots in tank range through marauders , early 2 marine marauder pushes and 6-9 pools will be rly hard to counter and in end game ultra nerf will hurt much more than tank nerf the tvz
The biggest problem I have with the zlot nerf isn't so much the early game. Blizzard will fix that if a problem arises from it. The problem imo is, it's just such a core unit which will undoubtedly have such drastic effects on all MUs, most BOs, most army combos... It also seems a bit strange to nerf such a core unit after 6 months of beta.
|
On August 28 2010 23:57 sux2bu wrote:
Tank Nerf :
The nerf only effects zealots and hydras . They still one shot lings and banelings. The splash dmg still does 100% dmg to closely packed lings and banelings so no extra banelings or lings survive. The collision size of lings and banelings are in 100% splash range.
You would be absolutly right if there where no areas with less then 100% splash dmg. Sadly i have to tell you, that you are absolutly wrong. Tanks might still one shot lings siting right next to the tanks target, but because the splash dmg scales down with increasing distance, less splash dmg always effects all units (as long as they dont have 1hp). Lings being a little further away will suffer much less pain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
