EPTI like the pun david kim. I like the pun.
but seriously. why not just change the carrier and the mothership?
would that have been that problematic. i mean its not like either is used that frequently anways.
Situation Report: Patch 1.4, Blizz's Explanations - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
chocolatebunny
301 Posts
I like the pun david kim. I like the pun. but seriously. why not just change the carrier and the mothership? would that have been that problematic. i mean its not like either is used that frequently anways. | ||
|
DeltruS
Canada2214 Posts
On September 23 2011 11:38 Clank wrote: 0.o, "bigger decisions". I wonder what this means, maybe a big ultralisk buff incoming if this update doesn't change their usefulness? It means a ton of people will go ultra after the patch, so they will be able to gather more data. If the ultra still is underpowered, they will buff it accordingly. Imo, it still will be pretty underpowered. The ultra can be good, but only if it has perfect surface area and either a surround or fungal. If a terran, toss or zerg knows how to avoid these situations by dropping more, putting down a wall of infested terrans, or spreading their units, then ultras will not kill them easily. | ||
|
Shiori
3815 Posts
On September 23 2011 11:37 gogogadgetflow wrote: C every version of the 1-1-1, be it shield marines or naked, raven or no, cloak banshees or uncloaked... they all have siege tanks. This is the data that bliz is looking at, and it was also mentioned on sotg. Siege tanks are a crucial aspect of the push and immortal range buff could help. edit: WHYYY not just remove the mothership and buff carriers (honestly, just decrease the build time and increase acceleration a little bit) that doesn't mean that the siege tank is the issue. if anything, the more obvious candidate is the marine. | ||
|
ForeverSleep
Canada920 Posts
| ||
|
Ryder.
1117 Posts
Why are you taking credit for calling this? They have released a situation report after all major patches lately, you don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to see this coming. Anyway sucks to hear they were thinking about the carrier but decided against it  | ||
|
skatbone
United States1005 Posts
"Immortals were a good choice due to the current meta-game moving away from heavy Immortal usage." When did the current meta-game revolve around "heavy Immortal usage"? Kim's wording--"moving away"--suggests that "heavy immortal usage" was once the norm. | ||
|
Tsuki.eu
Portugal1049 Posts
| ||
|
Demonace34
United States2493 Posts
| ||
|
Hipsv
135 Posts
On September 23 2011 10:59 GinDo wrote: David Kim Trolling us hard T_T. Blizz why!!!. Also when Kim said they wanted Bio and Mech in TvT he really meant, "We would like MM to be the staple of each match up". Yeah hellions kill workers really fast, but Marauders kill buildings even faster. I wish. I don't particularily see the problem with M or MM being the staple or backbone of each matchup, especially given that every other race's T1 is the backbone of the their 3 respective matchups. Terran is just fortunate enough to be able to choose in 2 (all on some maps) matchups whether they want a mostly t1 base or a mostly t2 base. | ||
|
darkscream
Canada2310 Posts
On September 23 2011 10:42 HypernovA wrote: I don't understand why do Zerg players want Ghosts to be nerfed. How else do you expect Terran to win versus Broodlord/infestors? Battlecruisers are actually a legit option, mostly because if you neural a bunch of BCs they actually can't kill each other. | ||
|
Aruno
New Zealand748 Posts
Maybe it's time for Carriers build time to be decreased? Carriers have a 120 second build time. Ultralisk pre 1.4 had 75, now 55. Wtf blizzard, Why do you not want carriers to be used at all? | ||
|
pezit
Sweden302 Posts
| ||
|
windsupernova
Mexico5280 Posts
On September 23 2011 11:42 chocolatebunny wrote: I like the pun david kim. I like the pun. but seriously. why not just change the carrier and the mothership? would that have been that problematic. i mean its not like either is used that frequently anways. They probably didn't want to make too many big changes at once. Balance is a fickle mistress, remember how a few months ago P was "impossible to beat". They probably want to see if this change helps and if not they will continue patching | ||
|
windsupernova
Mexico5280 Posts
On September 23 2011 11:52 skatbone wrote: I love the immortal range buff. However, I'm confused by this: "Immortals were a good choice due to the current meta-game moving away from heavy Immortal usage." When did the current meta-game revolve around "heavy Immortal usage"? Kim's wording--"moving away"--suggests that "heavy immortal usage" was once the norm. Well, PvP was moving more towards Blink based builds, and Immortals were nto used much in the other 2 MUs. Its just a more political workind on "not used much anymore" | ||
|
RusHXceL
United States1004 Posts
| ||
|
VirgilSC2
United States6151 Posts
| ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
However, I can't believe they changed the mothership over carriers. Really? Just axe the motherhsip already and replace it and add real carrier micro back. Singular units suck. Please replace the mothership in LotV at least so SC2 isn't permanently gimped. | ||
ZeromuS
Canada13389 Posts
| ||
|
snowbird
Germany2044 Posts
| ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
I don't wan't bio vs mech to be viable in TvT if it means TvZ and TvP are more boring (read - pure bio) as well. Marauders are too good. Get rid of them. | ||
| ||
