|
On July 16 2012 16:08 Charon1979 wrote:
Want to nerf Queens? No Problem... just change hellions so they dont provide mapcontrol + sometimes game ending aggression + denying creep + denying expansion + denying lings WHILE taking a 3rd behind 4 units.
Denying creep, denying lings, denying expansions = map control. I don't understand why you're listing those as separate things.
Also, if you don't want to be contained by 4 units, maybe make 4-5 units of your own? I hear roaches are pretty good against low numbers of hellions.
|
On July 16 2012 16:42 baba1 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 16:26 yeint wrote:On July 16 2012 16:12 TemujinGK wrote:On July 16 2012 14:59 TeamBreezy wrote:
All u got to do is look at the winners of tournaments since the patch. Stephano, scarlett, nerchio, violet... I can keep going. Terrans need the most help.
When any zerg can drone up to 75 while terrans and protoss are only at 50 scvs/probes at the same point, somwthing is wrong Horrible first post. If zerg could build workers only at the rate of P or T then it follows that they would have a comparable amount of units. if zerg has a comparable amount of units to P or T then the zerg loses. That's how the game was designed, zerg can only make huge droves of units because each individual one sucks horribly if your opponent has a comparably sized army. That's simply not true. Zerg units aren't weaker. Infestors are the strongest caster, by far. Corruptors are the strongest anti-air, and Broods are the strongest capital ships. The idea that Zerg is about mass amounts of cost inefficient units is only true for mutaling, which is hardly played these days. Whaaaat? Infestors are arguably the strongest spellcaster, maybe, but even there it's very situational. In many situations you would rather have templar/ghost over infestors, especially when facing infestors.
So when I am facing infestors, I'd rather want NOT infestors... Let me think for a brief second.
Why do I find this sentence so utterly weird?
|
queens are really strange
1queen kills two combat shield/stim marines
1queen decimates 2 marines
but queen is 2food, 150 minerals. 2marines is 2food, 100 minerals. so queens are more expensive, sure. but if you factor in transfuse it can totally make up that 50 mineral difference
queens are so powerful in the early game when its small battles vs small battles because then transfuse can be used at maximum strength. when theres 5queens and a couple have transfuse they will decimate anything in equal costs in that early game battle
lategame you cant micro off perfect strength transfuses like the early game. for example in 10food vs 10food 5queens vs X, easy to transfuse. but if its 30queens vs 6X then harder to get off perfect transfuses.
transfuse is still pretty strong lategame however if just to take half health broodlords/ultras between combat and get them to full hp
back to queens. why dont we see way more mass queens? their combat stats rival marines and they are tankier? so why not?
the reason is because queens are so fat and marines are so small, that in tvz mass queens would suck against mass bio +medivac because the bio units can stand together and fit more in a space so their DPS is much higher in that ball against the queens who are so fat and none of them are even shooting. and in pvz mass queens would just get outclassed by collossi+forcefields+storms. so thats why we dont see mass queens even though their combat stats are super strong
because queens are so fat with powerful individual stats they are very strong early but weak lategame so you cant mass queens in tvz or zvp.
i dont really think queens should be nerfed. instead i think generally accepted weak things in other races could be slightly improved by giving out buffs like this
give carriers and BC's like -30% on their buildtimes
make auto turrets the same size as infested terrans, and allow auto turrets to be "thrown out" the same way infested terrans can be "thrown out" in battle, make auto turrets no longer buildings so they are much easier placed in battle, make auto turret cast range equal to infested terran castrange. make auto turrets benefit from +mech upgrades same way infested terrans benefit from +armor and +ranged upgrades (but then make auto turrets no longer get that +2 building armor)
give HSM a 9 or so castrange. ive tested its damage and it really is not that strong as long as you spread out your units. HSM against spread units will deal as much as a storm for alot more energy
give hellions +5 health (honestly i think this should be done would really make the unit more in line with its cost)
also dammit i really think hydras should have passive ++improved regen while burrowed. hydras would be alot more viable if the ones at half health after battle got to be full health for the next battle. i dont think hydras should get extra base health because right now they 1v1 a stalker with 2health remaining and i dont wanna mess up that balance
|
On July 16 2012 16:08 Charon1979 wrote:
The whole discussion is pointless. To fix all the issues we have to fix EVERY ISSUE at once.
You want to nerf Infestor/Broodlord? No Problem with that, give Zerg another way to deal with Blinkstalker/Colossi/Mothership which is not "dont let toss get 3 bases".
You want to nerf Roaches? No problem here, just give Zerg another way to deal with the 300 Toss All-ins midgame where Roach defense is crucial.
Want to nerf Queens? No Problem... just change hellions so they dont provide mapcontrol + sometimes game ending aggression + denying creep + denying expansion + denying lings WHILE taking a 3rd behind 4 units.
Want to nerf infestors in TvZ? No Problem, just give us another non suicide unit to deal with marines.
ALL your suggestions get in one direction:
T = I want to kill Zerg in the early game again, screw lategame!
P= I want my Stalker/Colossi Deathball to be a 100% win again, I deserve it!
NP, larvae inject now only gives 2 larvae, it's about time that you guys started spending money on production.
|
i highly think other races production LATEGAME should be improved to better compete lategame zerg.
zerg should still be better in production ability, but not THIS MUCH BETTER
zerg lategame makes incredible amounts of larva while making ultralisks with a 55 second buildtime out of them or making 1 broodlord per larva
zerg has expansion hatcheries as their production and maybe 2 macro hatches in their main. so those 2 macro hatches is 700 extra minerals, plus you really only need 3queens (450 minerals) to inject those 4hatches in your main (2macro, main, and natural). i say 3queens for 4hatcheries because not even DRG has perfect injects and he lets queens build up energy so 3 is fine for 4 hatcheries
protoss spends 150/150 for a stargate that makes 1 carrier every 120 seconds
so just comparing toss and zerg. zerg has that 1050 mineral investment for his ultimate lategame production (plus expansion hatcheries but you can consider that as cost for expanding)
so with that 1050 mineral investment, zergs production is UNGODLY and hes making like 50 larva a minute and each larva could be a ultralisk
protoss on the other hand with a 1500/1500 investment could make 10 stargates for 10 carriers every 120 seconds. while the zerg gets 100 ultralisks every 120 seconds
so the zergs production is much more powerful than toss
i feel its just... way too strong
ZERG PLAYERS.... would you REALLYYYYYY have a problem if say, FACTORY, STARPORT, STARGATE, and ROBO units were maybe given -50% buildtimes across the board?
would you REALLY have a hard time dealing with this?
i mean think about it... protoss would STILL need to have 250/100 for each immortal he makes, the only difference is now he spends 200/100 on a robo facility that now produces as much immortals as 400/200 of production in the previous patch. So giving -50% on buildtimes for lategame units for toss/terran would essentially mean they are saving 50% money on production i believe bringing them a little bit closer to zergs strength, but zerg is still better
|
NP, larvae inject now only gives 2 larvae, it's about time that you guys started spending money on production.
Which leads to T and P all-inning you early and midgame because you cant keep up with their production and your units are not cost effective at this point of game.
|
On July 16 2012 16:08 Charon1979 wrote:
The whole discussion is pointless. To fix all the issues we have to fix EVERY ISSUE at once.
You want to nerf Infestor/Broodlord? No Problem with that, give Zerg another way to deal with Blinkstalker/Colossi/Mothership which is not "dont let toss get 3 bases".
You want to nerf Roaches? No problem here, just give Zerg another way to deal with the 300 Toss All-ins midgame where Roach defense is crucial.
Want to nerf Queens? No Problem... just change hellions so they dont provide mapcontrol + sometimes game ending aggression + denying creep + denying expansion + denying lings WHILE taking a 3rd behind 4 units.
Want to nerf infestors in TvZ? No Problem, just give us another non suicide unit to deal with marines.
ALL your suggestions get in one direction:
T = I want to kill Zerg in the early game again, screw lategame!
P= I want my Stalker/Colossi Deathball to be a 100% win again, I deserve it!
Oversimplification and obviously not what people want.
To me as a spectator both ZvP and ZvT feels skewed towards the zerg nowadays. Both terran and protoss need to move out and do damage but they're very exposed and if they get caught out of position they often times just lose everything (zealot+stalkers often get caught by less cost pure speedling for example, wtf is that?).
Zergs on the other hand can play safe and defensive, getting three bases up more or less immediately is standard nowadays. DRG vs Ryung on that large jungle map is an example of where the terran seems to be doing way, way more than the zerg yet the game was nailbitingly close. I think that if you'd give a similar strength deathbally style to top terran players the whine would be enormous.
|
Three more tournaments, three more Zerg champions, lol (Stepahno, Scarlett, dKiller), What about 2 (or even 1?) active creep tumor per queen. I feel that the ultra fast creep spread is one of the things makeing Zerg so strong right now. If Blizz would limit that balance could dip again. And with 4-6 queens you could still spread it pretty quickly, just not insanely fast.
|
On July 16 2012 18:01 CruelZeratul wrote:
Three more tournaments, three more Zerg champions, lol (Stepahno, Scarlett, dKiller), What about 2 (or even 1?) active creep tumor per queen. I feel that the ultra fast creep spread is one of the things makeing Zerg so strong right now. If Blizz would limit that balance could dip again. And with 4-6 queens you could still spread it pretty quickly, just not insanely fast.
i think the best way to fix creep would be to make creep dissipate INSTANTLY
make cleaning up creep alot stronger right now it takes creep forever to dissipate.
to compensate i wouldnt mind allowing overlords to spread creep while moving which would be a increidibly powerful ability essentially allowing queens to be full combat units at lair because 10 overlords spreading creep spread it faster than queens can walk
|
Problem: Zerg is (arguably) ridiculously overpowered in that it's production capabilities are too high considering that they also have some of the strongest units (can easily make 20 units off of 3 hatches per production cycle, and most Zergs have 3 hatches by 6 minutes nowadays)
Solution: Nerf inject from 4 larvae to 3
Side-effects: Early game and 3 base 80 drones is still secured with 6 queens. Zerg will just be a tiny bit more manageable later.
|
Problem:
Many balance changes have serious unintended side-effects, as they nerf/buff a unit just right to fix a problem, but create another problem in a different situation. Example: BC was nerfed with a 20% dmg reduction to fix BC rush with mass repair. BCs are quite weak late game.
Solution:
Change base stats less often. Change how upgrades affect a unit. If you want to make a unit weaker in the early game, lower base stats but compensate for a better upgrade benefit. Also allow threshold upgrades, where a unit gains an extra benefit, so their role can shift from one phase of the game to the next.
Example: Marauders could be changed from 10(+1)+10(+1) to armored to 10(+0)+10(+2) to armored. That means as the game progresses the marauder becomes weaker to light units. The role could shift more to a tank for such units. So give marauders an extra point of armor upon reaching +2 armor upgrade.
Sideeffects:
Game becomes harder to learn. Then again, such fine balance changes really only matter to players that will learn such exceptions and statistics anyways. Also for noobs it could be fun to 'discover' such stuff.
|
Problem:
Capital ships (Carrier, BC) are sadly lacking.
Solution:
For the carrier, the upgrades and the interceptor AI should be changed.
AI change:
As long as the carrier is in the primary range of the last target (range: 8) the interceptor will return after every second volley to the carrier to be repaired and shield recharged. This can happen in between volleys with no loss of dmg. If the interceptors are launched and the carrier retreats out of initial range (8) but stays in control range (currently: 14, could be extended to 18) interceptors are not repaired.
Carriers now have 1(+1) shield armor. Threshold: At +3 shields, carrier gain hardened shields.
Supply cost increased to 8.
Carriers are immune to Neural parasite as there are multiple protoss on board.
For the BC:
Ground Damage changed from 8(+1) to 8(+2).
Threshold: At +3 ship plating, BCs gain +1 armor and 50hp.
BCs can now shoot and move at the same time.
Supply cost raised from 6 to 8.
BCs are immune to Neural Parasite.
Side effects:
Don't really know. One might limit the number of capital ships to 1 per stargate/starport.
|
On July 16 2012 17:56 Charon1979 wrote:Show nested quote +NP, larvae inject now only gives 2 larvae, it's about time that you guys started spending money on production. Which leads to T and P all-inning you early and midgame because you cant keep up with their production and your units are not cost effective at this point of game.
make larva not stack like currently to 20. So zerg actually have to invest on more and more hatcheries later into the game
|
On July 16 2012 18:22 Thrombozyt wrote:
Problem:
Capital ships (Carrier, BC) are sadly lacking.
Solution:
For the carrier, the upgrades and the interceptor AI should be changed.
AI change:
As long as the carrier is in the primary range of the last target (range: 8) the interceptor will return after every second volley to the carrier to be repaired and shield recharged. This can happen in between volleys with no loss of dmg. If the interceptors are launched and the carrier retreats out of initial range (8) but stays in control range (currently: 14, could be extended to 18) interceptors are not repaired.
Carriers now have 1(+1) shield armor. Threshold: At +3 shields, carrier gain hardened shields.
Supply cost increased to 8.
Carriers are immune to Neural parasite as there are multiple protoss on board.
For the BC:
Ground Damage changed from 8(+1) to 8(+2).
Threshold: At +3 ship plating, BCs gain +1 armor and 50hp.
BCs can now shoot and move at the same time.
Supply cost raised from 6 to 8.
BCs are immune to Neural Parasite.
Side effects:
Don't really know. One might limit the number of capital ships to 1 per stargate/starport.
if anything BC needs to rely less on upgrades, not more. Same with carriers
|
On July 16 2012 17:53 tehmisk wrote:
i highly think other races production LATEGAME should be improved to better compete lategame zerg.
zerg should still be better in production ability, but not THIS MUCH BETTER
zerg lategame makes incredible amounts of larva while making ultralisks with a 55 second buildtime out of them or making 1 broodlord per larva
zerg has expansion hatcheries as their production and maybe 2 macro hatches in their main. so those 2 macro hatches is 700 extra minerals, plus you really only need 3queens (450 minerals) to inject those 4hatches in your main (2macro, main, and natural). i say 3queens for 4hatcheries because not even DRG has perfect injects and he lets queens build up energy so 3 is fine for 4 hatcheries
protoss spends 150/150 for a stargate that makes 1 carrier every 120 seconds
so just comparing toss and zerg. zerg has that 1050 mineral investment for his ultimate lategame production (plus expansion hatcheries but you can consider that as cost for expanding)
so with that 1050 mineral investment, zergs production is UNGODLY and hes making like 50 larva a minute and each larva could be a ultralisk
protoss on the other hand with a 1500/1500 investment could make 10 stargates for 10 carriers every 120 seconds. while the zerg gets 100 ultralisks every 120 seconds
so the zergs production is much more powerful than toss
i feel its just... way too strong
ZERG PLAYERS.... would you REALLYYYYYY have a problem if say, FACTORY, STARPORT, STARGATE, and ROBO units were maybe given -50% buildtimes across the board?
would you REALLY have a hard time dealing with this?
i mean think about it... protoss would STILL need to have 250/100 for each immortal he makes, the only difference is now he spends 200/100 on a robo facility that now produces as much immortals as 400/200 of production in the previous patch. So giving -50% on buildtimes for lategame units for toss/terran would essentially mean they are saving 50% money on production i believe bringing them a little bit closer to zergs strength, but zerg is still better
This, and Terran is even more gimped with late game production significantly worse than even Protoss.... it's really a mess when the game is balanced for mid 2010 maps.
|
On July 16 2012 18:23 iky43210 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 17:56 Charon1979 wrote:NP, larvae inject now only gives 2 larvae, it's about time that you guys started spending money on production. Which leads to T and P all-inning you early and midgame because you cant keep up with their production and your units are not cost effective at this point of game. make larva not stack like currently to 20. So zerg actually have to invest on more and more hatcheries later into the game
I believe there is a lot of truth to this. The art of Zerg in BW was to decide when to drone and when to build army units.
Also back then larvae was a very scarce and limiting ressource for Zergs.
It also was in the earlier stages of SC2.
There is a reason why Zerg was perceived to be weak at that time. P and T had various early game timings (coupled with small maps and bad scouting possibilities) which required a near perfect response from Z in terms of how many drones to make and when to stop doing so. However this was really hard to figure out and without any balance changes it might have taken several months for Zerg players to understand these timings and find an answer to it.
The way the game appears to me these days is that:
- The amount of early to midgame pushes and their potential vs Zerg has been severely limited
- Due to Queens being able to thwart off pressure quite well and Zerg getting 3 bases very early, Zergs are allowed to drone until they have a good saturation, i. e. the trade-off between economy and army is not such a crucial decision variable anymore
- Due to mass Queens and many hatches early on larvae is not a scarce ressource anymore, further diminishing the importance of larvae management which was a huge determinant of skill back in the days.
Thoughts?
|
On July 16 2012 18:25 iky43210 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 18:22 Thrombozyt wrote:
Problem:
Capital ships (Carrier, BC) are sadly lacking.
Solution:
For the carrier, the upgrades and the interceptor AI should be changed.
AI change:
As long as the carrier is in the primary range of the last target (range: 8) the interceptor will return after every second volley to the carrier to be repaired and shield recharged. This can happen in between volleys with no loss of dmg. If the interceptors are launched and the carrier retreats out of initial range (8) but stays in control range (currently: 14, could be extended to 18) interceptors are not repaired.
Carriers now have 1(+1) shield armor. Threshold: At +3 shields, carrier gain hardened shields.
Supply cost increased to 8.
Carriers are immune to Neural parasite as there are multiple protoss on board.
For the BC:
Ground Damage changed from 8(+1) to 8(+2).
Threshold: At +3 ship plating, BCs gain +1 armor and 50hp.
BCs can now shoot and move at the same time.
Supply cost raised from 6 to 8.
BCs are immune to Neural Parasite.
Side effects:
Don't really know. One might limit the number of capital ships to 1 per stargate/starport. if anything BC needs to rely less on upgrades, not more. Same with carriers
Upgrades for such units are important to stop carrier/BC rushes being OP while allowing them to be strong in the late game.
|
Protoss does not need major buffs such as -50% production time on robo/stargate. They're doing very well in korea in both PvZ and PvT. This PvZ whining is knee-jerk to Stephano beating Hero/MC.
If anything needs a buff it's Terran late game.
|
So annoying that Browder keeps calling carriers useless and having no place in the game when, with a few balance tweaks (like a faster build time), they could give protoss an option against mass BLs that doesn't require praying for a decent vortex.
|
On July 16 2012 18:46 Iamyournoob wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 18:23 iky43210 wrote:On July 16 2012 17:56 Charon1979 wrote:NP, larvae inject now only gives 2 larvae, it's about time that you guys started spending money on production. Which leads to T and P all-inning you early and midgame because you cant keep up with their production and your units are not cost effective at this point of game. make larva not stack like currently to 20. So zerg actually have to invest on more and more hatcheries later into the game I believe there is a lot of truth to this. The art of Zerg in BW was to decide when to drone and when to build army units. Also back then larvae was a very scarce and limiting ressource for Zergs. It also was in the earlier stages of SC2. There is a reason why Zerg was perceived to be weak at that time. P and T had various early game timings (coupled with small maps and bad scouting possibilities) which required a near perfect response from Z in terms of how many drones to make and when to stop doing so. However this was really hard to figure out and without any balance changes it might have taken several months for Zerg players to understand these timings and find an answer to it. The way the game appears to me these days is that: - The amount of early to midgame pushes and their potential vs Zerg has been severely limited - Due to Queens being able to thwart off pressure quite well and Zerg getting 3 bases very early, Zergs are allowed to drone until they have a good saturation, i. e. the trade-off between economy and army is not such a crucial decision variable anymore - Due to mass Queens and many hatches early on larvae is not a scarce ressource anymore, further diminishing the importance of larvae management which was a huge determinant of skill back in the days. Thoughts?
The problem with Zerg right now is, that they straight up don't have a good unit to invest into in the early game and early midgame, that allows them to hold in low economy games if the opponent attacks while being good in putting on pressure on the opponent. So you either waste money on ling/roach/bling or you drone up.
ZvT and ZvP have both been balanced around exactly one Zerg strategy: Drone to 60+ on 3base in around 10min, then start interacting with your opponent. On the other hand especially Terran and also Protoss (due to production design) kind of have to go for more units and therefore less economy and therefore some pressure against eco-only builds, but due to Zerg not having any options, even the eco-only builds have to be able to hold every attack.
Also due to how Terran and Protoss harass works, it's very hard to give it them a "safe" amount of damage:
-) reapers (if you could mass them fast like the old days) and hellions are fast with very high worker damage: you get them in the zergs base and you kill everything, not just a small amount
-) Banshee's and Voidrays (or voidray pheonix comobos) are either countered with enough antiair very early, or the long producing, slow early antiair (queens/spores) won't get up at all anymore and then it's again a straight up loss and not just a "safe amount of damage"
-) There is no reason to stop a Warpgate attack ever, if you are doing damage.
On a side note, this is not the case in ZvZ. Due to the opponent having larva as well, you need quite some investments in army/defense all the time. But without walls and longranged units that shoot from behind walls those invested units are actually very useful and straight up playing aggressive is often times a stronger strategy than defensive/ mass drone play.
I think the basic idea to counteract this should be to force Zerg into more units earlier (so in the 5-12min time), but make those units also better at dishing out some damage. I think the core of this problem is that blizzard made a unit for such a purpose --> roaches with their high life regeneration capabilities that could be reused again and again - but out of certain reasons it was changed(was it balancing? I'm not sure. I thought I read once that they scrapped this concept because it was too random and too hard to read. You would have to focusfire roaches, but sometimes they would still survive, and other times they would just go down one by one very quickly. But not sure where I got this from or whether it was just something someone told me) And even at the time it was changed, it wasn't too terrible, because 2armor, 1 supply 3range roaches were still quite a good deal for the zerg early on and basically everybody did put down a roach warren in the first 5mins. The problem with 1armor 2supply 4range roaches however ist that the change has made them more expensive (so more commited early on), less durable (so less longterm capabilities of the early roaches) very potent at a timing where you can produce them nonstop (because of the strongly increased costefficientness in big balls of 4range) and completly useless when you have other choices in a maxed scenario. (ultras more durable, zerglings more costefficient and mobile, infestors - a thousand times more universal etc etc)
So as I see it, for WoL their/our best hope should be, that they find a sweet spot in which the MUs are balanced and macrogames are possible with neither race having a big advantage by deafault after something like 20min. (BCs/Ravens take to long to get up and to upgrade, Carriers as well, but the Protoss situation with the mothership and warpgate-archons and warpgate-templar is quite better and the transition way smoother)
For HotS from what we have seen, I hope that they see the concepts/potential of the units the way I see them and make at least a bunch of those strategies against zerg possible:
-) early gateway pressure, due to no forge required to expand (mothershipcore) and due to the safety of not losing units if the zerg is prepared, because of recall
-) reactored widow mine openings being able to snipe queens, slowing down the zerg production, while not "killing X drones to get even", and maybe blocking 3rd base spots with burrow and deactivated autodetonate
-) Mech play allowing for more passive Terran play, that the other races have to put pressure against
-) better capitalship transitions for T/P (redline reactor maybe making earlier BC harass possible, Tempest being useful because it forces engagements, even if you don't have a lot of them. Also less upgrade dependend than the Carrier)
-) Oracle harass slowing down zerg
and on the zerg flip side:
-) hydras and swarm hosts being useful midgame units, that might even work when produced from 2base economy (or even transitionable 1base Swarm Host cheese against Protoss, because he needs obs and an army to kill it?), so no need to balance everything around 10min 60+ drones on 3bases for zerg.
-) earlier hive play with viper/hydra upgrade/ling upgrade that does slow down the zerg eco and basecount, but allows to be more aggressive in the midgame (10min hive for vipersupport anyone?)
and one last hope:
-) plz rework the roach. It's not the unit that it was designed to be. I absolutly hope that your unwillingness to show the roach in the battlereports until now and the fact that you hide most unit stats in them (hydralisks seem quite stronger) means that there is some major changes coming for the roach.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
