|
On September 16 2011 06:03 Jacob666 wrote:
I find all this all quite funny as i go infestor ling/bane against toss, i never in any games get NP and i usually win (low masters). To see so many protoss players hating on NP makes me laugh as the ability as a whole is completely useless already and a waste of money to research it when it only makes your infestors extreamly vulnerable while they are using it, i have never seen a good protoss player let a collosus be kept neural parasited for more then 1-2 seconds.
sure, ling/bane/infestor, 2 full energy sentries and a collosus. Bye.
|
Ok, I made it to page 10 but this is getting to long too quickly so I'll just say my piece and get out of the way. (From a Zerg perspective)
NP (as I saw it) was not OP. Fungal was broken, I never really liked the change from the start and I still don't and now I think Blizzard has created a bigger mess for themselves to balance.
When the change to fungal originally went though I thought Blizzard was trying to address the heal rate of medivacs and the Protoss death ball and thought it might be easier to just tinker with one thing rather than tackle both issues. With a longer duration (and no blinking away) while under fungal baneling bombs would still be viable, corruptors can get a flank in good position on Collosi with Stalkers immob, etc. I never liked the idea of the caster being the main damage dealer in the army and the rest felt like fodder.
NP seems to be worthless now. To get the upgrade and all the things (aside from Thors) that I want to grab with Neural now putting my already squishy feeling Infesters even closer. People are complaining about "balancing" like when KA was taken out. This isn't about a balance issue (and KA was broken... The cast time for a ghost to EMP w/ upgrade - 45 sec, Infester to fungal with upgrade, 50 sec, HT to storm warped in w/o upgrade - 49.5 sec plus time to get in postion, HT w/ upgrade was 5 secs!). Honestly, my Infesters usually end up getting sniped unless I can quickly grab everything in a matter of a second or two and stay out of range of being sniped by every other unit. If you miss a colossus or tank you can bet they are told to target your infester.
TL;DR - I would like the old Fungal back, with maybe a 33% damage increase on armoured (and a slow, 75%, instead of a snare would even be great). Medivac heal rate cut in half so fungal can still do some kind of damage but Zerg isn't "just" making Infesters to kill things (even if Medivac had a tech lab upgrade at Starports for dual beams like the campaign at a half heal rate so you don't have to overcompensate with mass medivac but it's still doing half the heal rate but to two units [4.5 hp/s * 2 = 9 still while FG will do 4.5 dam/sec). Something rather than having a spell become broken and lets "retweek" everything else because we can't think of something. I don't think Fungal was ever the problem until Blizzard started to mess with it.
|
On September 16 2011 06:16 Heavenly wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2011 06:13 R3N wrote:On September 16 2011 06:01 Heavenly wrote:On September 16 2011 05:56 R3N wrote:On September 16 2011 05:50 Cloud9157 wrote:On September 16 2011 05:47 R3N wrote:On September 16 2011 05:44 Cloud9157 wrote:On September 16 2011 05:43 R3N wrote:On September 16 2011 05:37 Cloud9157 wrote:
Zergs are seriously hilarious.
Can I get a unit that can steal your massives, snare everything you have, and then have a billion little devils blocking you from getting to it? Protoss are seriously hilarious. Can I get a unit that can storm-rape your entire army, 1-shott all your casters, and then morph into a-moving rapeArchons blocking you from winning the game? But wait... My AoE spell actually requires research+resources... And my Archon requires 12 seconds to form, and 100/300 in resources... My NP requires research+ resources...And when I'm out of energy I can't form another unit and thus put my thumbs in my mouth and try to look useful. But you can take bases more freely than me and as a result, get so many resources... Plus you don't spend gas on anything other than research/buildings (assuming ling/Infestor). Are we done yet? Wtf? I don't understand, are you insinuating infestors are cheaper than HT?! I do agree infestors is a SLIGHTLY better unit but their still in the same caliber (both way below ghosts LOL) and take roughly the same amount of risk/reward (infestors more risk - believe it or not - but also more reward). I guess HT require more tech (focused). But still take more bases? I'm zerg, that's what I'm supposed to do as a result of my armies (maxed) fail to even take the shields off your deathball. You can't take resources in the equation without considering all factors. Uh, that's not what he said? He said that you have more resources which makes it easier to get more infestors. They're not cheaper but if you're on three bases worth of gas to my two bases worth of gas you can get more gas units than I can. And man, it is becoming annoying hearing all the whining about deathballs still. There have been so many high level games of zergs destroying "deathballs" easily, of zerg beating protoss while on equal bases, etc. Watch replays, compare positioning, tech, upgrades, and army value, and you'll understand why you lost the game opposed to "DEATHBALL IS STRONG". ...... As I said, I'm zerg and not protoss. My units aren't ½ as efficient as yours. That's why I get access to more bases faster than you can. Zerg can't win any half-decent ZvP on equal bases. One might think people figure that out by now.... Here, I'll make ridiculous unfounded statements too: Protoss units are not cost-effective versus zerg. If you prove your statement I'll prove mine. You're also going on a completely different tangent of the original statement that you'll have more infestors than templar.
Proven my statement? So you really do believe protoss units are to be as easily massed as zerg?
I think you need to enlighten the entire starcraft community and ofc, blizzard about this gospel of truth. As the other way 'round is widely accepted by everyone but you.
Also we were talking about gas efficient and you came in straying shit about archons and how roaches beat them.
|
Everyone that has said NP is now useless have you even tried it ?
|
On September 16 2011 03:59 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2011 03:55 Doodsmack wrote:
Blizzard almost seems to respond to zerg QQ...are Terrans not QQing enough about the barracks nerf? Terrans are actually doing amazing right now so they have no reason to complain. If you really think the NP being removed to not use vs massive units was fair will lol. I personally am thinking NP won't be used much anymore after this patch as you'll never neural a colossi (tosses normally have 2 minimum and infestors are quiet week so focusing the infestor before it gets close to NP will work wonders). Guess I need to figure out zvp again on what is best yay..
Korean terrans are doing amazing. They make these changes with a lot of respect to the ladder statistics as well.
|
On September 16 2011 05:57 windsupernova wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2011 05:49 MandoRelease wrote:
So while zerg gets a double nerf on the infestor, terran's ghost gets nothing. Blizzard is acting a big strange. Ghost is as much an issue as the infestor.
I'm not really disagreeing with the nerf (nor am i agreeing), we'll see how things will go after the patch, but it'd be great if blizzard stoped looking away when it comes to Terran. Major changes are almost always for the other races, while Terran gets minor change everytime. Be more drastic with Terran, even if it means reverting back to the previous state, like with the other races. 5s is nothing. Yeah man, nerfing Siege Tanks, Medevac speed, Stim timming, Supply before barracks, Nitro pack at Factory level, Reapers at 50s build time, BC AtG nerf were all minor changes. Stop pretending as if Blizzard favours one race over the other.
Lol this post is so stupid. Present nerfs should be based on the present state of the game, not on how many nerfs were made prior to this nerf. It's completely irrelevant.
|
On September 16 2011 06:19 Ammanas wrote:
WoW is the best balanced MMORPG by far (well, in PvP Warrhammer is better, but in PvE it has the best balance between classes and WoW never was really a PvP game)
WoW is becoming increasingly homogeneous due to Blizzard's inability to balance the classes. And even then, balancing PvE is just about the easiest thing ever. Have a character automatically doing their optimum spell rotation on a dummy, tweak ability output until all classes for that role have a roughly equal output.
|
On September 16 2011 06:21 R3N wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2011 06:16 Heavenly wrote:On September 16 2011 06:13 R3N wrote:On September 16 2011 06:01 Heavenly wrote:On September 16 2011 05:56 R3N wrote:On September 16 2011 05:50 Cloud9157 wrote:On September 16 2011 05:47 R3N wrote:On September 16 2011 05:44 Cloud9157 wrote:On September 16 2011 05:43 R3N wrote:On September 16 2011 05:37 Cloud9157 wrote:
Zergs are seriously hilarious.
Can I get a unit that can steal your massives, snare everything you have, and then have a billion little devils blocking you from getting to it? Protoss are seriously hilarious. Can I get a unit that can storm-rape your entire army, 1-shott all your casters, and then morph into a-moving rapeArchons blocking you from winning the game? But wait... My AoE spell actually requires research+resources... And my Archon requires 12 seconds to form, and 100/300 in resources... My NP requires research+ resources...And when I'm out of energy I can't form another unit and thus put my thumbs in my mouth and try to look useful. But you can take bases more freely than me and as a result, get so many resources... Plus you don't spend gas on anything other than research/buildings (assuming ling/Infestor). Are we done yet? Wtf? I don't understand, are you insinuating infestors are cheaper than HT?! I do agree infestors is a SLIGHTLY better unit but their still in the same caliber (both way below ghosts LOL) and take roughly the same amount of risk/reward (infestors more risk - believe it or not - but also more reward). I guess HT require more tech (focused). But still take more bases? I'm zerg, that's what I'm supposed to do as a result of my armies (maxed) fail to even take the shields off your deathball. You can't take resources in the equation without considering all factors. Uh, that's not what he said? He said that you have more resources which makes it easier to get more infestors. They're not cheaper but if you're on three bases worth of gas to my two bases worth of gas you can get more gas units than I can. And man, it is becoming annoying hearing all the whining about deathballs still. There have been so many high level games of zergs destroying "deathballs" easily, of zerg beating protoss while on equal bases, etc. Watch replays, compare positioning, tech, upgrades, and army value, and you'll understand why you lost the game opposed to "DEATHBALL IS STRONG". ...... As I said, I'm zerg and not protoss. My units aren't ½ as efficient as yours. That's why I get access to more bases faster than you can. Zerg can't win any half-decent ZvP on equal bases. One might think people figure that out by now.... Here, I'll make ridiculous unfounded statements too: Protoss units are not cost-effective versus zerg. If you prove your statement I'll prove mine. You're also going on a completely different tangent of the original statement that you'll have more infestors than templar. Proven my statement? So you really do believe protoss units are to be as easily massed as zerg? I think you need to enlighten the entire starcraft community and ofc, blizzard about this gospel of truth. As the other way 'round is widely accepted by everyone but you. Also we were talking about gas efficient and you came in straying shit about archons and how roaches beat them.
What is the first part even talking about? What? I never said anything remotely like that.
And watch any GSL ZvP. Z destroys P utterly in the matchup. This month was like 25% winrate and it would've been lower if protoss didn't one base all-in a couple games. Zerg completely shits on protoss and you are sitting here acting as if stalker/archon kills THREE zerg armies, which has never actually happened. You're just making random inaccurate statements, probably from your experiences in silver league or something, hence my sarcasm.
Um, my talking about roaches v archons was in response to saying that roaches are a soft counter and me saying they aren't. That was me responding to a statement, not me going on a tangent.
|
wtf. making infestor useless in an entirely different way. now feedback outranges NP, emp outranges NP.
Its even more useless than when it couldn't neural massives, because at least you could still neural tanks and immortals and medivacs and VRs.
|
On September 16 2011 06:19 aWildRATTATA wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2011 06:10 Yaotzin wrote:On September 16 2011 06:05 aWildRATTATA wrote:
I haven't really posted alot on these forums, but alas.
If they nerf NP, they may as well nerf that ridiculous unit called the colossus, it simply has no strategic weaknesses aside from having to build AA to defend it.
It has a ton of health, does a ton of damage, has great mobility due to cliffwalking, is usually safe because of its range, and requires little APM. Getting a magic number of 3-4 colossus isnt hard at all. As far as counters go, Neuralling a colossus is op because all of a sudden a protoss army lacks range to snipe the infestor, lacks the DPS, and you're indeed stuck with a useless corearmy of stalkers and maybe a few sentries.
The problem with colossi is, basically, that they force you into a deathball style of play. This is because colossi, obviously, require many support units. Aside from timing pushes, the deathball style is really, really bad. It gets picked apart by small, mobile armies doing multipronged attacks and drops - because these armies work fine in small numbers whereas a colossi based army does not.
I'm only plat, but i see this as a fundamental flaw in the race/game.
Well, you're wrong. If you were right professional players would take advantage of this unit, instead of making it only when absolutely necessary. It has been the bread and butter unit for all protoss matchups AFAIK. Now with the ghosts denying forcefields and NP rediscovered, protoss has no dependable composition and has no real composition that has any stenght on any front.
This used to be true, but hasn't been for months. Gateway styles are utterly dominant now, and colossi are generally only made as a lategame switch, and even then only in small numbers (4 max usually).
|
United States7483 Posts
You know what guys? Can we stop the Protoss hate on Zerg and the Zerg hate on Protoss? We're both the underdogs here, let's direct our hate at the overpowered Terrans, alright?
YOU HUMAN JERKS.
|
On September 16 2011 03:46 Alejandrisha wrote:
Looks like they don't want infestors np'ing colosi or tanks, but rather immortals and thors to try and take out the longer range units. Also a big buff in HT vs infestor wars that were pretty tough. You still can't rush to ht to fight 2 base infestor because you won't have storm AND enough ht to deal with the infested terrans but the HT will be a lot stronger in the later stages of the game against infestors.
except immortal also got a range buff, meaning that in conjunction with range nerf for NP, now you have infestors dying to colossus range and/or feedback before being able to NP immortal.
|
On September 16 2011 06:12 tuho12345 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2011 06:05 aWildRATTATA wrote:
I haven't really posted alot on these forums, but alas.
If they nerf NP, they may as well nerf that ridiculous unit called the colossus, it simply has no strategic weaknesses aside from having to build AA to defend it.
It has a ton of health, does a ton of damage, has great mobility due to cliffwalking, is usually safe because of its range, and requires little APM. Getting a magic number of 3-4 colossus isnt hard at all. As far as counters go, Neuralling a colossus is op because all of a sudden a protoss army lacks range to snipe the infestor, lacks the DPS, and you're indeed stuck with a useless corearmy of stalkers and maybe a few sentries.
I'm only plat, but i see this as a fundamental flaw in the race/game.
While erg and terran can play a multitude of styles which your opponent must react to accordingly till one of them slowly loses footing, a protoss simply disregards everything and does nothing less than an all-in to secure a third base. Unless the protoss manages to destroy the third of the opponent by the means of a 2-base timing, the game is pretty much over, because protoss is always stuck with a lumbering slowass army.
Every race has different design. I.e Zerg has fastest and smallest units. Terran is medium, could be faster with stim, while Protoss is big and slow, but strong. I'll take it as you're Platinum, you don't experienced much styles and your opponents rather slow APM and reaction. So don't talk too much shit when you don't know much about it.
Yes, i know the strenghts of the races. Maybe big slow and powerful is a flawed concept and should be reworked.
In SC1 playing mech TvP, you atleast had vultures, mines and a ton of bases to harass. Just saying.
|
Our Colossi lasers..
will blot out the Infestors.
FG is still a pain in the ass though 
|
On September 16 2011 06:24 Whitewing wrote:
You know what guys? Can we stop the Protoss hate on Zerg and the Zerg hate on Protoss? We're both the underdogs here, let's direct our hate at the overpowered Terrans, alright?
YOU HUMAN JERKS.
Rage Against the Marine?
|
I think I like this change, Infestors can still fungal my whole army no problem. Now it will take sick positioning to fungal my stalkers+NP something useful without getting your infestor sniped.
Seems pretty similar to how difficult it is PvT to neutralize ghosts with feedback and still get storms off on the bio.
Either way its def a better change than basically nerfing NP out of the game.
|
On September 16 2011 06:26 Truedot wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2011 03:46 Alejandrisha wrote:
Looks like they don't want infestors np'ing colosi or tanks, but rather immortals and thors to try and take out the longer range units. Also a big buff in HT vs infestor wars that were pretty tough. You still can't rush to ht to fight 2 base infestor because you won't have storm AND enough ht to deal with the infested terrans but the HT will be a lot stronger in the later stages of the game against infestors. except immortal also got a range buff, meaning that in conjunction with range nerf for NP, now you have infestors dying to colossus range and/or feedback before being able to NP immortal.
Yep I agree; I spoke of that in a subsequent post
on sotg last night destiny said catz was joking about the immortal buff being a hidden NP buff because they can hit colossi with more certainty... Yeah idk about that 
|
On September 16 2011 06:24 Whitewing wrote:
You know what guys? Can we stop the Protoss hate on Zerg and the Zerg hate on Protoss? We're both the underdogs here, let's direct our hate at the overpowered Terrans, alright?
YOU HUMAN JERKS.
Even Terrans are admitting they're OP now, it's taken all the fun out of complaining about them
|
On September 16 2011 06:29 Yaotzin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 16 2011 06:24 Whitewing wrote:
You know what guys? Can we stop the Protoss hate on Zerg and the Zerg hate on Protoss? We're both the underdogs here, let's direct our hate at the overpowered Terrans, alright?
YOU HUMAN JERKS. Even Terrans are admitting they're OP now, it's taken all the fun out of complaining about them
Complain about Terrans stealing your thunder by admitting it!
|
On September 16 2011 06:19 Ammanas wrote:
I am just friggin gold player (more enjoying watching SC2 then playing) but I have to ask one thing: Why the hell do all of you think, you are better in keeping balance then Blizzard is?
I mean, SC1 is perfectly balanced game (yeah, it took a long time), WoW is the best balanced MMORPG by far (well, in PvP Warrhammer is better, but in PvE it has the best balance between classes and WoW never was really a PvP game). Also they have A TON of statistical data (more then anyone, of course) and they have data that no one else has.
The thing is, they are not basing their ballance at some subjective feelings or whatever, they are basing it on statistics. And statistics almost never lie. And I don't mean just basic winning percentage, if it works anything like in WoW, they literally have statistics of everything everyone has done in every game. And they have employees, whose full time job is to analyze those statistics/data.
So let me ask one more time. Why do YOU think, you know better then Blizzard?
I am pretty blown away that you are bringing up WoW balance (which is confusing considering how slow and retarded they have been at balancing it since release) in reference to SC2. I don't really care to argue about how broken WoW has been during most of it's lifespan in this thread either. I guess I'll just answer your question with a question. Why do YOU think, WoW has anything to do with SC2 balance?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
