Designated Balance Discussion Thread - Page 1254

On January 13 2016 07:41 Foxxan wrote:
Zerg less larva, so need to produce hatcheries.
So less armee but in lategame this is quite uneffected since it will be the same kind of larva as before.

The mule nerf however makes it so Terran can never have the same income as before, therefore making terran have less macro structures throughout the whole game.

Am i missing something here?

On January 13 2016 07:41 Foxxan wrote:
@MerkMerk
Why cant zerg add some ravagers instead of mutas then?
Or go faster to hive, add ultras?

Why do zerg need ling/bane/muta in particular?
Why do it have to be the same as in Hots?

On January 13 2016 07:58 Big J wrote:

You can also just make an extra OC. Both races have to invest a little bit if they want to get to HotS level (or even beyond), but it's all a question of spending. In the end it's an RTS and "when" you make stuff matters, one way or another.


It has been the only way to play against medivacs. Ravager+Infestor might be an alternative. But I personally don't believe that this will viable 6 months from now. You just won't ever kill a medivac and have 30+ supply locked into your bases. I mean, we are talking about top Koreans who will not get hit by skillshots if they are looking at all.
I think some form of spire play, maybe corruptors, to prevent single dropships to camp between your bases will be necessary when players get better.

You just won't ever kill a medivac and have 30+ supply locked into your bases. I mean, we are talking about top Koreans who will not get hit by skillshots if they are looking at all.

On January 13 2016 06:28 Big J wrote:

I can't remember saying that, sorry. But it's not impossible that I did.

But I think my argument these days would be twofold. The design part is that I like things that give you indications and warnings and delays before you take damage. Because such things are allowed to be stronger, because the opponent gets a greater opportunity to diminsh the effect through micromanagement. (ravager shots with visual and audio warnings, same for disruptor shots; siege animations of mines/tanks/liberators lurkers; "the circle" of liberators; the widow mine visual clues; the melee nature of banelings, fungal projectile, seeker missile)

But more than that I don't think you could just remove the circle and call it balanced. The range interaction of the liberator and other units is very razor edge and the circle can be placed sloppily or very effectively. It would be plain impossible to deal with liberators in the same way as currently. Even professionals would take like double the amount of hits and the stats would have to be adjusted accordingly.
Also I'm not sure how exact the facing of the liberator is, which is the only clue you'd still have. Instead of playing around a circle you might have to play around a pretty huge cone. Behold incredibly paint drawing incoming:

On January 13 2016 05:19 TimeSpiral wrote:


Nonsense. The Mutas don't have to engage the Liberators unless they have to. Just like the Mutas don't have to engage the Marines, or the Thors. The issue was that with the accelerated pace of play, Marines and Thors would be infinitely too slow to properly defend the Mutas, or a Muta switch, and still be able to survive the incredibly-powerful late-game tech of a Zerg.

The Liberator is fine. If anything, could probably use a super small buff to the time it takes to exit defender mode. At least make it possible to dodge a bile, even it it's hard. Requiring an accurate prediction seems a little rough.

On January 13 2016 02:46 DinoMight wrote:
Here's what I'd change. Note this is just minor tweaks not a whole game redesign. I have serious issues with things like the economy and some of the units but those aren’t changing at this point.

Protoss:
-Chrono boost back to the old one. It rewards planning better and is more flexible in its usage. Also helps with tech transitions to keep up with Zerg.
-Increase Photon Overcharge energy requirement to 50 and keep the damage the same but just a little bit longer, maybe from 11 seconds to 15 or so
-Reduce warpgate research by 5-10 seconds.
-Increase the cool down on the Adept shade ability by a few seconds OR damage reduced by 1 vs light (so they 3 shot marines before combat shields and SCVs)
-Increase regular adept movement speed
-Buff Colossus damage towards what it was in HotS (maybe a little less) or include a small buff to +light damage in the upgrade (increased effectiveness against Lings, Hydras, Marines)
-Reduce Carrier build time to 60 and remove release interceptors

Terran:
-Reduce add-on build time by a few seconds
-Reduce Cyclone cost to 125/100 or so without changing stats OR keep same cost but allow them to be made without a tech lab
-Liberators require Armory
-Battlecruisers build a bit faster

Zerg:
-Reduce spine crawler build time (they take forever lol)
-Reduce Corrosive Bile's range to 8 from 9 so they need to take more risks casting it OR Make Ravagers smaller so splash damage is more effective against them, and make them armored
-Reduce Lurker den build time, as it's quite long right now
-Reduce Lurker range to 7.5 from 9 (so they can be outranged by Colossi, which are supposed to be siege units)
-Make Parasitic bomb not stack AND PUT IT ON THE INFESTOR


Rationale:

Protoss
Want to give increased flexibility against Zerg in the early game while nerfing Adepts a bit in early game PvT
Want to make Protoss less reliant on spamming PO and allow Terran to harass them more
Want to compensate by buffing Colos in the mid game since P won't be playing with such an econ advantage
Want to make Carrier transitions viable without making them OP (release interceptors is the culprit)

Terran
Some early game buffs to help stop the bop losses to 3 Protoss units
Slight buffs to the Cylcone to encourage their use defensively (I think they’re great against banshees and Warp Prisms etc.)
Liberator nerf to stop the ridiculous Liberator/Tank rushes and general Liberator behind the minerals nonsense
Battlecruiser buff because they don’t see enough play

Zerg
Basically, I want to see fewer Ravagers. The unit is good against everything. There should be more decision making by the Zerg. Roaches are already pretty versatile.
Lurkers take too long to get but they limit the players’ options too much when they’re on the field. A slight range nerf would help Protoss players fight them better with Storm or Colossi. I’d like to see Lurkers used in more situations and that’s not really possible right now.
Parasitic bomb does its damage way too fast for a human to be able to split. Nerfing the damage is irrelevant because one extra Viper will accomplish the same effect. This ability should obviously just not stack. Also, having PB on the Viper makes the unit counter too many things. I'd rather have it on the infestor where it's available earlier to the Zerg to defend against mass air, but doesn't create a scenario where Vipers counter "their own counter."

Summary:

TvP: buff Terran early so the game is played on even economic footing, then buff Protoss mid/late to compensate

PvZ: better ability to pressure the Zerg early on when he goes for a greedy build like 3 hatch, better transitioning options while limiting the OP carrier scenario

TvZ: fewer ravagers, in general. Less Liberator abuse.



Thoughts?

On January 13 2016 12:43 pure.Wasted wrote:


You are under the mistaken assumption that any nerfs to the Liberator would be accompanied by buffs elsewhere. Need I remind you of the time the Warhound was scrapped and then... the end?

You're just not used to having a tier 2+ combat unit that is actually worth having all of the time. Now you know what having Ultralisks, Archons, and Colossi feels like.

On January 13 2016 12:43 pure.Wasted wrote:


You are under the mistaken impression that any nerfs to the Liberator would be accompanied by buffs elsewhere. Need I remind you of the time the Warhound was scrapped and then... the end?

You're just not used to having a tier 2+ combat unit that is actually worth having all of the time. Now you know what having Ultralisks, Archons, and Colossi feels like.

On January 13 2016 16:32 pure.Wasted wrote:


1. Consider the possibility that what is best isn't Liberators being nerfed and other units being buffed, but other units just being buffed. See: Thor anti-air buff which comes sans a Liberator nerf clause. The Roach didn't get a nerf so that Ultras, Vipers, and Zerglings could all buffs. Ultras, Vipers, and Zerglings just got buffs.

2. The Adepts' and Liberators' situations aren't as analogous as you suggest. Even if Adepts are perfectly fine in mid/late-game engagements (still very open to interpretation), their presence has 2014-levels disastrous implications on TvP early game. They allow shit Protoss to beat good Terrans, just because the defense was out of position for 5 seconds. Meanwhile, Liberators introduce a positional element into engagements that have traditionally been boring blob vs blob contests. So regardless of which race is winning at what timestamp in the MU, there are compelling design reasons for keeping the Liberator strong (which only a buffed tank could reproduce, and Blizzard isn't buffing the tank), and for making WP/Adept harassment less of a free win at the very least.

On January 13 2016 08:56 LSN wrote:


Some pretty solid points.

Especially: Colossi should outrange lurker; less ravager and less liberator massing.