|
Everything bad with protoss balance comes back to the stalker being terrible and yet the need for it to be terrible because of blink and forcefields.
As such there is no real fix without a massive redesign which is at best only a hope for LOTV since thats the only time protoss will have the necessary attention spent on them.
They could do with making the blink stalker and the regular stalker into 2 units for a start.
In fact I wouldn't be suprised if some variation of the blink stalker becomes the fabled HOTS harass unit.
Till then a buff to stalker damage to light might be a band aid. I cant see that as too big a problem cause even with similar dps to their armored dps they'd still beat what they beat and lose to what they lose to for cost.
Keep their shitty upgrade scaling so that we can assume that if they have blink their attack become comparatively weaker as they dont scale as well with ups compared to other units.
|
On September 08 2011 05:55 Truedot wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2011 15:11 XD_Melchior wrote:On September 07 2011 07:03 Hikari wrote:
My opinion of mules:
- Necessary to terran early game economy, esp before full mineral saturation.
- They offer a unique "investment" option for terrans. You feel slightly ahead, but not by much? Build an extra CC and turn it into an OC. 2.5 mules late you regained your investment and every extra mule become pure profit - with the added benefit of extra scv production (think of it as investing 550 for constant CB on probes ~ investment comes back in 3 minutes later)
- Very late game they allow terran to "live off" mules: leaving behind only maybe 12 scvs for gas = bigger army, but these situations 30 minutes into the game can be quite rare and unique.
- There is a tactical aspect to mules: you can save them up and float an OC over to a gold and spam mules. The gold will be depleted in record times. In combination of the "investment OC" option, this is a very strong economical benefit.
I've always thought that giving the OC a MULE range (like 9) would be a good fix. Terran can still use MULEs just as much in the early/mid game, the only difference is that they have to use them at the base the OC is at. (e.g. instead of going to base #2 and using 2 MULEs, they'll have to use 1 MULE at base #1 and 1 MULE at base #2. Minor inconvenience, but I assure you still nowhere as near as bad as larva injecting.) So what does that do? That helps take out the imbalance of dumping insane MULEs from all your OCs at a gold. AND the imbalance of taking a gold with a PF then dumping MULEs from other OCs there. AND the imbalance of floating to an island and dumping MULEs there. BTW, if your main runs you, you can always float that OC to another mining base to get double MULEs. Or, you can keep the OC there and have that as your designated scan base.  OMG, a limitation on mule drop point from the OC. you sir have created the most useful idea that doesn't nerf MULES at all directly but forces terran to be mobile and plan ahead with mineral consumption of bases, and thus makes terran like P and Z again. This should be implemented immediately.
That's the worst suggestion ever. Really, what's the point? to create the SC2: "no fun allowed" edition? In fact, to make SC2 even more exciting, the mule should be slightly buffed. Mules drops should damage units. I'm not asking for some really useful damage (even if you already can use them for tank splash damage), just like 10 or 15 damage per mule. Really, 270 minerals for 10 damage would be the worst trade ever, but that would be the ultimate manner mule. To kill the last units of your enemy by hammering them with mules.
By constantly nerfing units, this game is becoming less fun. Reapers were awesome to micro, but now, they become useless. Terran lost an entire unit because of nerfs.
Frankly, if SC2 has a problem, it is not balance, but design. Protoss simply lacks one unit: the reaver. It would cover all the weakness of that race. It's a good high risk/high benefit unit for early harass, and it's a good unit for siege breaking (1-1-1). Of course, they should try to recreate the stupid AI of the BW reaver, as a smart reaver would be really deadly.
|
Whatever MC's opinion on whether or not stargate is imbalanced is, doesn't really matter. He uses the stargate opening every single PvZ, jesus christ. This has nothing to do with what I'm even talking about.
So, you still sound like you're talking about the same build I've been seeing for a very long time. Originally it gained popularity as a TvT build using Vikings for sight to boost Seige Tank range, and Marines for support, but it allowed for quick tech switches or openings as Banshees, or Raven PPD timing pushes. I've been seeing this build in TvZ, TvP and TvT pretty much since beta. So, it's very strange to me when you call it a "new build."
Perhaps, what's really gone on here is a shift in the Protoss compositions that's allowing for greater success in an air-centric support role in the TvP metagame that has caused a shift from the more traditional BioMech builds that dominated TvP for a long time?
Are you like trolling or something? Just do a search.
|
Anyone else watch sotg last night? I think it's worth mentioning that demuslim was shocked that ghosts wern't nerfed with how op they are, lololol. I think his wording was "they're disgusting"? can't remember fully.
Funny shit tho, imo. Pretty sure ghosts will be tweaked soon enough tho.
|
I LOVE how people LOVE to say the Protoss players are not near the caliber of MVP and etc. and that is why they are losing. If MVP played Protoss he would lose due to the LIMITED options Protoss has in early game... Terran is a VERY complete race; the most versatile race in the game.
To be honest, Protoss players need to stop whining. Hongun, Trickster, Inca, Choya, ... you see how bad they all are? Your only good Protoss is MC. When he starts owning you all look so stupid for whin-
^ QFT. Protoss also has strength in their linear play, in how strong they are. And there's no shortage of innovative Protoss builds either, I seriously doubt that Choya is a better Protoss than MVP would be after a year of practice. Like are you even reading what you're saying (the top post, that is).
But either way, Terran may be OP in TvP. It's not a match-up I understand thoroughly (some people seem to bring up valid points about MULEs encouraging 1 base play and the doom of expanding against a 1 base Terran, which is supposedly needed). All I'm saying is that the Protoss players are what's to blame for the losses in Protoss - people like choya, hongun, and anypro play like low Masters in many of their games (losing to 6 pool stops happening in plat...), and MC is just being outplayed on a metagame level (FFE+stargate) in PvZ.
I wouldn't say Huk, Genius, Alicia, Ace, Naniwa, or MC are bad or cheesy players, but anypro, hongun, choya... come on. Anyways, Huk did well this season (lost in TvP), MC (TvP and outdated metagame PvZ), Alicia (too far behind on failed DT, then BO loss into midgame), Genius (TvP), Puzzle (TvP), Killer (PvP), Trickster (TvP). Sase failed on his all in, and forgot what Naniwa did. Inca and JYP did not make HT and played horribly, and were behind on stargate.
And how exactly do P players suggest that Z is OP? You never saw why, you just say Zerg QQ is wrong, but none of the GSL games had a situation where Zerg QQ arose (ie deathball, colossi).
|
On September 08 2011 08:49 legaton wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2011 05:55 Truedot wrote:On September 07 2011 15:11 XD_Melchior wrote:On September 07 2011 07:03 Hikari wrote:
My opinion of mules:
- Necessary to terran early game economy, esp before full mineral saturation.
- They offer a unique "investment" option for terrans. You feel slightly ahead, but not by much? Build an extra CC and turn it into an OC. 2.5 mules late you regained your investment and every extra mule become pure profit - with the added benefit of extra scv production (think of it as investing 550 for constant CB on probes ~ investment comes back in 3 minutes later)
- Very late game they allow terran to "live off" mules: leaving behind only maybe 12 scvs for gas = bigger army, but these situations 30 minutes into the game can be quite rare and unique.
- There is a tactical aspect to mules: you can save them up and float an OC over to a gold and spam mules. The gold will be depleted in record times. In combination of the "investment OC" option, this is a very strong economical benefit.
I've always thought that giving the OC a MULE range (like 9) would be a good fix. Terran can still use MULEs just as much in the early/mid game, the only difference is that they have to use them at the base the OC is at. (e.g. instead of going to base #2 and using 2 MULEs, they'll have to use 1 MULE at base #1 and 1 MULE at base #2. Minor inconvenience, but I assure you still nowhere as near as bad as larva injecting.) So what does that do? That helps take out the imbalance of dumping insane MULEs from all your OCs at a gold. AND the imbalance of taking a gold with a PF then dumping MULEs from other OCs there. AND the imbalance of floating to an island and dumping MULEs there. BTW, if your main runs you, you can always float that OC to another mining base to get double MULEs. Or, you can keep the OC there and have that as your designated scan base. OMG, a limitation on mule drop point from the OC. you sir have created the most useful idea that doesn't nerf MULES at all directly but forces terran to be mobile and plan ahead with mineral consumption of bases, and thus makes terran like P and Z again. This should be implemented immediately. That's the worst suggestion ever. Really, what's the point? to create the SC2: "no fun allowed" edition? In fact, to make SC2 even more exciting, the mule should be slightly buffed. Mules drops should damage units. I'm not asking for some really useful damage (even if you already can use them for tank splash damage), just like 10 or 15 damage per mule. Really, 270 minerals for 10 damage would be the worst trade ever, but that would be the ultimate manner mule. To kill the last units of your enemy by hammering them with mules. By constantly nerfing units, this game is becoming less fun. Reapers were awesome to micro, but now, they become useless. Terran lost an entire unit because of nerfs. Frankly, if SC2 has a problem, it is not balance, but design. Protoss simply lacks one unit: the reaver. It would cover all the weakness of that race. It's a good high risk/high benefit unit for early harass, and it's a good unit for siege breaking (1-1-1). Of course, they should try to recreate the stupid AI of the BW reaver, as a smart reaver would be really deadly.
If we get stupid reavers, we need to re-stupid the tank fire.
|
On August 22 2011 11:14 GreatestThreat wrote:
Below are my suggested changes for Infestors. These are just one part of an entire HotS dreampatch I am currently working on that I'll probably post in its own thread sometime this week when I get it more streamlined.
Infestor
* Fungal Growth
- Now has a bloom effect - spreads from the center of AoE instead of hitting all targets at once. Takes 0.9 seconds to complete.
- Slows affected units movement speed by 150% instead of snaring them in place.
- Duration increased from 4 to 6 seconds.
- Can no longer reduce a non-Biological unit to less than 1 health.
- Bonus damage vs Armored removed. Deals 48 damage to Air.
- Ignores Protoss shields.
I'll post my suggested changes for Protoss and Terran Tier 1 units next as the current trending topic for imbalance seems to be TvP. I feel like it needs to be tackled from the bottom up (i.e. the problems are sentries, stalkers, marines, marauders, less so ghosts and HTs).
I know the above poster probably won't catch my question (it was posted in 50 something page) but can anyone tell me what he means by slowing movement by 150%? Moon-walk back toward the casting infestor?
|
On September 08 2011 08:49 legaton wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2011 05:55 Truedot wrote:On September 07 2011 15:11 XD_Melchior wrote:On September 07 2011 07:03 Hikari wrote:
My opinion of mules:
- Necessary to terran early game economy, esp before full mineral saturation.
- They offer a unique "investment" option for terrans. You feel slightly ahead, but not by much? Build an extra CC and turn it into an OC. 2.5 mules late you regained your investment and every extra mule become pure profit - with the added benefit of extra scv production (think of it as investing 550 for constant CB on probes ~ investment comes back in 3 minutes later)
- Very late game they allow terran to "live off" mules: leaving behind only maybe 12 scvs for gas = bigger army, but these situations 30 minutes into the game can be quite rare and unique.
- There is a tactical aspect to mules: you can save them up and float an OC over to a gold and spam mules. The gold will be depleted in record times. In combination of the "investment OC" option, this is a very strong economical benefit.
I've always thought that giving the OC a MULE range (like 9) would be a good fix. Terran can still use MULEs just as much in the early/mid game, the only difference is that they have to use them at the base the OC is at. (e.g. instead of going to base #2 and using 2 MULEs, they'll have to use 1 MULE at base #1 and 1 MULE at base #2. Minor inconvenience, but I assure you still nowhere as near as bad as larva injecting.) So what does that do? That helps take out the imbalance of dumping insane MULEs from all your OCs at a gold. AND the imbalance of taking a gold with a PF then dumping MULEs from other OCs there. AND the imbalance of floating to an island and dumping MULEs there. BTW, if your main runs you, you can always float that OC to another mining base to get double MULEs. Or, you can keep the OC there and have that as your designated scan base. OMG, a limitation on mule drop point from the OC. you sir have created the most useful idea that doesn't nerf MULES at all directly but forces terran to be mobile and plan ahead with mineral consumption of bases, and thus makes terran like P and Z again. This should be implemented immediately. That's the worst suggestion ever. Really, what's the point? to create the SC2: "no fun allowed" edition? In fact, to make SC2 even more exciting, the mule should be slightly buffed. Mules drops should damage units. I'm not asking for some really useful damage (even if you already can use them for tank splash damage), just like 10 or 15 damage per mule. Really, 270 minerals for 10 damage would be the worst trade ever, but that would be the ultimate manner mule. To kill the last units of your enemy by hammering them with mules. By constantly nerfing units, this game is becoming less fun. Reapers were awesome to micro, but now, they become useless. Terran lost an entire unit because of nerfs. Frankly, if SC2 has a problem, it is not balance, but design. Protoss simply lacks one unit: the reaver. It would cover all the weakness of that race. It's a good high risk/high benefit unit for early harass, and it's a good unit for siege breaking (1-1-1). Of course, they should try to recreate the stupid AI of the BW reaver, as a smart reaver would be really deadly.
I totally agree. Balance isn't really the issue in SC2, but rather overall design. Hopefully Blizzard swallows their pride in HOTS and give the esports community what they want.
Really all the casuals got their game ->WOL. And if they liked it their going to buy HOTS regardless if , for example, the marauder is no longer in the game.
While the Hardcores will only invest in HOTs if there a legitimate push towards a better ESports game.
|
On September 08 2011 11:13 GinDo wrote:
While the Hardcores will only invest in HOTs if there a legitimate push towards a better ESports game.
Umm no, they will buy it regardless.
Kinda annoying how balance discussion usually ends up with rants about "marauderz ruining starcraft" and some other vague shit in the name of "ESPORTS". The unit is fine, if you cannot accept design that is different from the BW model then its you are the problem. The scene is certainly thriving as it is, despite you making the whole game sound like a failed experiment.
|
On September 08 2011 10:19 Belial88 wrote:Show nested quote +
I LOVE how people LOVE to say the Protoss players are not near the caliber of MVP and etc. and that is why they are losing. If MVP played Protoss he would lose due to the LIMITED options Protoss has in early game... Terran is a VERY complete race; the most versatile race in the game.
Show nested quote +To be honest, Protoss players need to stop whining. Hongun, Trickster, Inca, Choya, ... you see how bad they all are? Your only good Protoss is MC. When he starts owning you all look so stupid for whin- ^ QFT. Protoss also has strength in their linear play, in how strong they are. And there's no shortage of innovative Protoss builds either, I seriously doubt that Choya is a better Protoss than MVP would be after a year of practice. Like are you even reading what you're saying (the top post, that is). But either way, Terran may be OP in TvP. It's not a match-up I understand thoroughly (some people seem to bring up valid points about MULEs encouraging 1 base play and the doom of expanding against a 1 base Terran, which is supposedly needed). All I'm saying is that the Protoss players are what's to blame for the losses in Protoss - people like choya, hongun, and anypro play like low Masters in many of their games (losing to 6 pool stops happening in plat...), and MC is just being outplayed on a metagame level (FFE+stargate) in PvZ. I wouldn't say Huk, Genius, Alicia, Ace, Naniwa, or MC are bad or cheesy players, but anypro, hongun, choya... come on. Anyways, Huk did well this season (lost in TvP), MC (TvP and outdated metagame PvZ), Alicia (too far behind on failed DT, then BO loss into midgame), Genius (TvP), Puzzle (TvP), Killer (PvP), Trickster (TvP). Sase failed on his all in, and forgot what Naniwa did. Inca and JYP did not make HT and played horribly, and were behind on stargate. And how exactly do P players suggest that Z is OP? You never saw why, you just say Zerg QQ is wrong, but none of the GSL games had a situation where Zerg QQ arose (ie deathball, colossi).
two word when I read this post: wow,really?
If you think stargate opening are outdated, tell us? What is a good opening? Im surprised you think you know mroe than MC on whats outdated and whats not on protoss. MC is the flagship of toss. He innovates more than any other player probably as he probably came up with half the builds protoss use these days(DT expand was also perfected by him, gate expo into stargate to stop roach rush to void ray build dismantles terran wall), when he stays on a build you know that the build is the best atm. He is the best protoss for a reason.
|
On September 08 2011 11:26 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2011 11:13 GinDo wrote:
While the Hardcores will only invest in HOTs if there a legitimate push towards a better ESports game. Umm no, they will buy it regardless. Kinda annoying how balance discussion usually ends up with rants about "marauderz ruining starcraft" and some other vague shit in the name of "ESPORTS". The unit is fine, if you cannot accept design that is different from the BW model then its you are the problem. The scene is certainly thriving as it is, despite you making the whole game sound like a failed experiment.
T_T so sad you feel like that. I was only putting an example didn't mean to get out all fired up. I didn't actually mean anything about that unit specifically. But whatever to each their own.
I will say though design in SC2 does need revamping. And I'm going to stick to it. Its not so much balance. A fix in balance would mean that their are specific units or abilities that are ruining the game. Design problems point towards the interactions of the game as a whole. For example 1-1-1 which requires a specific counter and even then it is difficult to hold, yet the counter to 1-1-1 instantly gets crushed by MM.
Is the Marine, tank, banshee, or raven specifically the issue? I think not, but rather how PvT match up develops.
Also nowhere in my post did I mention BW. SC2 is its own game.
+ Show Spoiler +IN THE NAME OF ESPORTS. That comment you made is a little silly considering everything in TL is pretty much in the name of esports. TL is Esports.
|
I know the above poster probably won't catch my question (it was posted in 50 something page) but can anyone tell me what he means by slowing movement by 150%? Moon-walk back toward the casting infestor?
The first word he says is "Slows". Use context clues. I mean obviously he thinks FG should buff the units it's cast on /rolleyes
If you think stargate opening are outdated, tell us? What is a good opening? Im surprised you think you know mroe than MC on whats outdated and whats not on protoss. MC is the flagship of toss. He innovates more than any other player probably as he probably came up with half the builds protoss use these days(DT expand was also perfected by him, gate expo into stargate to stop roach rush to void ray build dismantles terran wall), when he stays on a build you know that the build is the best atm. He is the best protoss for a reason.
It's outdated in the metagame, just like 4 gating or 6 gating. It's not necessarily a bad build, but it's bad against what Zerg are doing these days, and it's doubly bad against Zerg's response to another thing P's doing, FFE (since it allows creep for spores to be built earlier, etc).
But I'd say the 3 gate sentry expand never really got 'outdated', and 1 gate FE works great too, particularly MC's 1 gate FE stargate.
I'm not saying stargate is a bad build like 6 pooling is bad, I'm saying that most Zerg take a super fast third in response to FFE. The point of a stargate is to deny a third by Zerg, but super fast thirds 'win' because it allows queen/creep for spores. So it's pretty much that Zerg are blind countering stargate play with fast thirds (since droning is the 'counter' to stargate play) right now. 1 base stargate openers like MC's 1 gate FE stargate are much better (since Zerg won't take a fast third until P expands).
It's just like how Zerg got smashed when P found out about 3 gate sentry expand, and how useful sentries were. Soon, Protoss will change to deal with Zerg dealing with what Protoss did.
|
On September 08 2011 08:49 legaton wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2011 05:55 Truedot wrote:On September 07 2011 15:11 XD_Melchior wrote:On September 07 2011 07:03 Hikari wrote:
My opinion of mules:
- Necessary to terran early game economy, esp before full mineral saturation.
- They offer a unique "investment" option for terrans. You feel slightly ahead, but not by much? Build an extra CC and turn it into an OC. 2.5 mules late you regained your investment and every extra mule become pure profit - with the added benefit of extra scv production (think of it as investing 550 for constant CB on probes ~ investment comes back in 3 minutes later)
- Very late game they allow terran to "live off" mules: leaving behind only maybe 12 scvs for gas = bigger army, but these situations 30 minutes into the game can be quite rare and unique.
- There is a tactical aspect to mules: you can save them up and float an OC over to a gold and spam mules. The gold will be depleted in record times. In combination of the "investment OC" option, this is a very strong economical benefit.
I've always thought that giving the OC a MULE range (like 9) would be a good fix. Terran can still use MULEs just as much in the early/mid game, the only difference is that they have to use them at the base the OC is at. (e.g. instead of going to base #2 and using 2 MULEs, they'll have to use 1 MULE at base #1 and 1 MULE at base #2. Minor inconvenience, but I assure you still nowhere as near as bad as larva injecting.) So what does that do? That helps take out the imbalance of dumping insane MULEs from all your OCs at a gold. AND the imbalance of taking a gold with a PF then dumping MULEs from other OCs there. AND the imbalance of floating to an island and dumping MULEs there. BTW, if your main runs you, you can always float that OC to another mining base to get double MULEs. Or, you can keep the OC there and have that as your designated scan base. OMG, a limitation on mule drop point from the OC. you sir have created the most useful idea that doesn't nerf MULES at all directly but forces terran to be mobile and plan ahead with mineral consumption of bases, and thus makes terran like P and Z again. This should be implemented immediately. That's the worst suggestion ever. Really, what's the point? to create the SC2: "no fun allowed" edition? In fact, to make SC2 even more exciting, the mule should be slightly buffed. Mules drops should damage units. I'm not asking for some really useful damage (even if you already can use them for tank splash damage), just like 10 or 15 damage per mule. Really, 270 minerals for 10 damage would be the worst trade ever, but that would be the ultimate manner mule. To kill the last units of your enemy by hammering them with mules. By constantly nerfing units, this game is becoming less fun. Reapers were awesome to micro, but now, they become useless. Terran lost an entire unit because of nerfs. Frankly, if SC2 has a problem, it is not balance, but design. Protoss simply lacks one unit: the reaver. It would cover all the weakness of that race. It's a good high risk/high benefit unit for early harass, and it's a good unit for siege breaking (1-1-1). Of course, they should try to recreate the stupid AI of the BW reaver, as a smart reaver would be really deadly.
... wat?
I'd be totally OK if you disagreed and argued that it wouldn't be balanced... but your reason for it being the "worst suggestion ever" is because of manner mule BM?
Are you serious?
Scan flowers and /dance still exist. I'm surprised floating base BM hasn't done yet. Or Terrans can take a lesson from MC and proxy CC. 
|
Can we all agree that Protoss' late game is strong, but its mid (or early) game is weak? If yes, should it be fixed?
|
Designated Balance Discussion Thread hmm... here's my chance to shine!
To Cure Mech Mobility: Similar to Stim (in as much as it makes a unit less than it was after it's buff) give Terran Mech an Afterburner sort of thingy. It will give your Mech army 150% of it's speed for 4 seconds (i dunno) but then will leave those units temporarily slowed by 50% for a 40 second cool down. (kinda similar to the minus-health-trade-for-plus-damage relationship with Teraan Bio but this more of a minus-speed-trade-for-plus-speed relationship.) [i did not discuss a nerf but we all know....]
To Cure Zerg: Increase hydra speed on creep. Yes, ON creep. I'm talking like speedling without speed upgrade fast (which would be a difference of 2.25 -> 2.9531) We can discuss that idea if you like, </haha> Decrease damage of Fungal Growth on light units from 36-30 but bring back the increased damage against Armored. Get fucking rid of the Corruptor and bring back teh (sic) Devourers.
To Cure Protoss: Increase Carrier Interceptor life by +10 (40 -> 50). Increase Gateway build time by 10-15% (may make Gateway builds viable, less WarpGate funneled).
I hope I'm not mauled.
|
On September 08 2011 14:55 ectonym wrote:
Designated Balance Discussion Thread hmm... here's my chance to shine!
To Cure Mech Mobility: Similar to Stim (in as much as it makes a unit less than it was after it's buff) give Terran Mech an Afterburner sort of thingy. It will give your Mech army 150% of it's speed for 4 seconds (i dunno) but then will leave those units temporarily slowed by 50% for a 40 second cool down. (kinda similar to the minus-health-trade-for-plus-damage relationship with Teraan Bio but this more of a minus-speed-trade-for-plus-speed relationship.) [i did not discuss a nerf but we all know....]
To Cure Zerg: Increase hydra speed on creep. Yes, ON creep. I'm talking like speedling without speed upgrade fast (which would be a difference of 2.25 -> 2.9531) We can discuss that idea if you like, </haha> Decrease damage of Fungal Growth on light units from 36-30 but bring back the increased damage against Armored. Get fucking rid of the Corruptor and bring back teh (sic) Devourers.
To Cure Protoss: Increase Carrier Interceptor life by +10 (40 -> 50). Increase Gateway build time by 10-15% (may make Gateway builds viable, less WarpGate funneled).
I hope I'm not mauled.
Mech mobility is called Medivac (Thors definetely should be ferried around in one to provide a more mobile defense against Mutalisks). The whole point of lacking mobility is to provide an achilles heel as a tradeoff for the power of the Siege Tanks. You are SUPPOSED TO be slow and leapfrogging with Turrets, Bunkers and Siege Tanks ... people who are asking for more mobility are just too lazy to do it and should instead ask for an "I win button".
I dont see how the Hydra is the reason Zerg is "bad". Every race has their underused units ...
There is hardly any point to Carriers if the Interceptors are shot down this easily AND when you have to pay for them to be built in the first place. Zerg dont have to pay for the Broodlings the Broodlord creates and maybe an energy system would be a great idea ... kinda like enabling the Carrier to generate Interceptors like the Infestor can create Infested Terrans. There should be some default Interceptors too though ... maybe 4 basic Interceptors and then generating 8 more instantly for 100 energy.
|
Can we all agree that Protoss' late game is strong, but its mid (or early) game is weak? If yes, should it be fixed?
I don't think so (I mean TvP could be broken as all hell but I am only talking about ZvP). The only reason P are losing so much right now is because stargate play, which was once seen as solid harass (I guess like how Nestea considers mutas in ZvZ, it wins even if you know it's coming from the start), actualyl sets you really far back if the opponent handles it right. Zerg also know now that you can 'counter' stargate with a fast hatch and droning (because it means lack of warp gate push).
They are also losing because Zerg know how to counter FFE and hold off 2 base timings from FFE. I predict FFE will be seen as a bad build.
If anything I think Protoss needs some kind of harass like reapers or hellions where you aren't so behind it's almost an autoloss (like DT and SG) if you do it. 1 void ray is prohibitively expensive, and if Zerg handles it right there's no way for P to win.
Of course maybe TvP is broken, I dunno about that at all.
To Cure Mech Mobility: Similar to Stim (in as much as it makes a unit less than it was after it's buff) give Terran Mech an Afterburner sort of thingy. It will give your Mech army 150% of it's speed for 4 seconds (i dunno) but then will leave those units temporarily slowed by 50% for a 40 second cool down. (kinda similar to the minus-health-trade-for-plus-damage relationship with Teraan Bio but this more of a minus-speed-trade-for-plus-speed relationship.) [i did not discuss a nerf but we all know....]
Mech is horrible. It only relies on killing drones with hellions, and from there it's basically a timing push before broodlords. If you don't kill drones, you won't win (unless the opponent makes infestors instead of mutas or not enough roaches? i dunno, basically screws up).
But it's ridiculously powerful. It's immobility is the one thing that keeps it balanced, otherwise it'd come too quick (on small maps it's pretty much impossible for Zerg to beat mech).
To Cure Zerg: Increase hydra speed on creep. Yes, ON creep. I'm talking like speedling without speed upgrade fast (which would be a difference of 2.25 -> 2.9531) We can discuss that idea if you like, </haha> Decrease damage of Fungal Growth on light units from 36-30 but bring back the increased damage against Armored. Get fucking rid of the Corruptor and bring back teh (sic) Devourers.
Hydras are actually really fast on creep as it is, they are faster than any Protoss ground unit, and even off creep I believe they are faster than most P units. The problem is they die way too easily, it's similar to Protoss trying to use DTs are combat units, or Terran trying to use banshees are an army. They die way too fast. That, and they are way too susceptible to splash. They just need to be removed from the game completely, they are only an all-in unit. Any buff would make it brokenly imbalanced, but at the moment it's niche is horrible. Maybe buff it, and then make it longer to come out, if anything.
FG is Aoe. No matter what the damage is, even 30, it's going to rape light units. 3FG to kill Marines instead of 2 is still going to fucking rape (and you know, there's stim, banelings, and ling/infestor too).
Get rid of corruptor is cool, but not sure about what to replace it with.
Increase Carrier Interceptor life by +10 (40 -> 50). Increase Gateway build time by 10-15% (may make Gateway builds viable, less WarpGate funneled).
Carrier is balanced, it's just that these units called vikings and corruptors exist. On top of that, Terran doesn't go siege tanks in TvP. If Terran went siege tanks like in brood war in TvP (for the long game, not 111) then P would make carriers.
I dont see how the Hydra is the reason Zerg is "bad". Every race has their underused units ...
Hydras are horrible units, and Blizz designed them to be Zerg's answer to mutas, phoenix, banshees, thors, and stalkers. Instead, it turns out all those units counter the hydra. We even see now that mutas will beat hydras when micro'd in ZvZ. Now, Zerg is left with no choice but to make mutas in ZvZ (whatever, its a mirror match up) and struggling to counter certain units in other matchups. Zerg is stuck with making mass spores and queens, which severely cripples Zerg's ability to be an interestin race. Instead, Zerg is stuck having to just macro, and has no ability to really be aggressive, and is severely limited in options and makes the gamepaly quite linnear. On top of that, the game is basically balanced on bad design with units like infestors or mass roach supposed to to be the 'counter' to air. Which is okay, but leaves holes in Zerg's play.
I mean, just remove the unit, Zerg is fine without it. But it makes it obvious what Zerg can do, and limits their ability to be aggressive.
|
On September 08 2011 11:12 usethis2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 11:14 GreatestThreat wrote:
Below are my suggested changes for Infestors. These are just one part of an entire HotS dreampatch I am currently working on that I'll probably post in its own thread sometime this week when I get it more streamlined.
Infestor
* Fungal Growth
- Now has a bloom effect - spreads from the center of AoE instead of hitting all targets at once. Takes 0.9 seconds to complete.
- Slows affected units movement speed by 150% instead of snaring them in place.
- Duration increased from 4 to 6 seconds.
- Can no longer reduce a non-Biological unit to less than 1 health.
- Bonus damage vs Armored removed. Deals 48 damage to Air.
- Ignores Protoss shields.
I'll post my suggested changes for Protoss and Terran Tier 1 units next as the current trending topic for imbalance seems to be TvP. I feel like it needs to be tackled from the bottom up (i.e. the problems are sentries, stalkers, marines, marauders, less so ghosts and HTs). I know the above poster probably won't catch my question (it was posted in 50 something page) but can anyone tell me what he means by slowing movement by 150%? Moon-walk back toward the casting infestor?
He was probably bad in math... But moonwalking marines would be funny =D
|
On September 08 2011 15:18 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2011 14:55 ectonym wrote:
Designated Balance Discussion Thread hmm... here's my chance to shine!
To Cure Mech Mobility: Similar to Stim (in as much as it makes a unit less than it was after it's buff) give Terran Mech an Afterburner sort of thingy. It will give your Mech army 150% of it's speed for 4 seconds (i dunno) but then will leave those units temporarily slowed by 50% for a 40 second cool down. (kinda similar to the minus-health-trade-for-plus-damage relationship with Teraan Bio but this more of a minus-speed-trade-for-plus-speed relationship.) [i did not discuss a nerf but we all know....]
To Cure Zerg: Increase hydra speed on creep. Yes, ON creep. I'm talking like speedling without speed upgrade fast (which would be a difference of 2.25 -> 2.9531) We can discuss that idea if you like, </haha> Decrease damage of Fungal Growth on light units from 36-30 but bring back the increased damage against Armored. Get fucking rid of the Corruptor and bring back teh (sic) Devourers.
To Cure Protoss: Increase Carrier Interceptor life by +10 (40 -> 50). Increase Gateway build time by 10-15% (may make Gateway builds viable, less WarpGate funneled).
I hope I'm not mauled. Mech mobility is called Medivac (Thors definetely should be ferried around in one to provide a more mobile defense against Mutalisks). The whole point of lacking mobility is to provide an achilles heel as a tradeoff for the power of the Siege Tanks. You are SUPPOSED TO be slow and leapfrogging with Turrets, Bunkers and Siege Tanks ... people who are asking for more mobility are just too lazy to do it and should instead ask for an "I win button". I dont see how the Hydra is the reason Zerg is "bad". Every race has their underused units ... There is hardly any point to Carriers if the Interceptors are shot down this easily AND when you have to pay for them to be built in the first place. Zerg dont have to pay for the Broodlings the Broodlord creates and maybe an energy system would be a great idea ... kinda like enabling the Carrier to generate Interceptors like the Infestor can create Infested Terrans. There should be some default Interceptors too though ... maybe 4 basic Interceptors and then generating 8 more instantly for 100 energy.
the Hydra speed upgrade idea IMO opens into more risky strats for the Zerg. If he has 6 Hydras at his base, it would increase the Zerg player's focus on things outside the base i.e. spreading creep and scouting more. It seems that Zerg loses all his ability to see/do outside of his base if he fears air.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
