On February 13 2012 05:03 Snowbear wrote: If you look at the winrates from terran you see them dropping VERY HARD when the games enters the 20 min mark. Since ghosts are used 99% of the time lategame (after the 20 min mark), blizzard nerfed terran lategame. Meanwhile terran lategame is so so so so so so bad.
Yeah I would love to have access to these statistics after a point in time.
For example,
If Terran wins the game, how often is that game:
>5 minutes >10 minutes >20 minutes >40 minutes
I can only add anecdotal experience as a Rank 2 master, but I win late game TvP, or TvZ at about 20%. I can be way ahead on econ., even if I have a 2nd FE early in a game versus P (as a response to nexus first) and still lose these games. Terran just doesn't have a good mineral dump (zergs = macro hatches, toss = tons of warpgates, cannons). Also, Terran can't replenish their army in the same way as Zerg or Protoss. So if your army dies, most likely, you just lost the game.
Terran has the best mineral dump in the game in the form of macro orbitals, as it frees up supply and you can roll with a 150+ supply army. A way to spend my minerals in the lategame is the least of my worries.
As for gas dumps our options are lacking, ravens are the obvious solution but they simply don't do much.
No, when I say mineral dump, I Don't mean to say another way that Terran can exponentially increase their minerals. But instead, to Spend those minerals in a way that will help them win the game.
Perhaps you misunderstand the functionality of the mineral dump. The idea of the mineral dump is either to create a bunch of defensive structures (cannons, spine crawlers) that solidify/defend position OR a means to reinforce your army (macro hatches, warpgates).
And being able to get 50 extra supplies into army over your opponent by dumping minerals into orbitals and sacking scvs is exactly that by your own definition.
On February 13 2012 05:03 Snowbear wrote: If you look at the winrates from terran you see them dropping VERY HARD when the games enters the 20 min mark. Since ghosts are used 99% of the time lategame (after the 20 min mark), blizzard nerfed terran lategame. Meanwhile terran lategame is so so so so so so bad.
Yeah I would love to have access to these statistics after a point in time.
For example,
If Terran wins the game, how often is that game:
>5 minutes >10 minutes >20 minutes >40 minutes
I can only add anecdotal experience as a Rank 2 master, but I win late game TvP, or TvZ at about 20%. I can be way ahead on econ., even if I have a 2nd FE early in a game versus P (as a response to nexus first) and still lose these games. Terran just doesn't have a good mineral dump (zergs = macro hatches, toss = tons of warpgates, cannons). Also, Terran can't replenish their army in the same way as Zerg or Protoss. So if your army dies, most likely, you just lost the game.
Terran has the best mineral dump in the game in the form of macro orbitals, as it frees up supply and you can roll with a 150+ supply army. A way to spend my minerals in the lategame is the least of my worries.
As for gas dumps our options are lacking, ravens are the obvious solution but they simply don't do much.
No, when I say mineral dump, I Don't mean to say another way that Terran can exponentially increase their minerals. But instead, to Spend those minerals in a way that will help them win the game.
Perhaps you misunderstand the functionality of the mineral dump. The idea of the mineral dump is either to create a bunch of defensive structures (cannons, spine crawlers) that solidify/defend position OR a means to reinforce your army (macro hatches, warpgates).
No, I'm pretty sure you're the one that's confused. It's a mineral dump if you can dump a ton of minerals into it. Period. And yes, orbitals help you win the game by freeing up more supply for army...
Also, it's just bad for the game that terran has to significant damage before the late game to have a chance to survive it.
So you would like to play a passive game vs an overexpanding/overdroning zerg and still have a chance lategame? Zerg is a macro race. It's by design their strength if left unchecked.
What makes it different from playing the same way as Terran? If both Z and T rush for 4 bases without attacking, T should still have a few "timing" attacks to hit to force some units form zerg/kill some drones BUT assuming all goes equal as far as bases and workers, T will be weaker. T's expansion mindset will be forced to "better expand during this push so if this timing fails I have another one".
That is false. You think of zergs mechanic as terran. You are not supposed to have the same amount of bases but still not insanely behind.
Think of the pvz matchup. Nowadays protoss is forced to do an early aggresion or else the 3 base zerg play is overwhelming. Zerg reaches max pop at 13th minute mark if left unchecked and than he expands and remaxes over and over. This is how the race is. Terran and protoss have to do something to stop that.
The ghost was strong vs ultras and broodlords and infestors, and zergs QQ when all their broodlords get sniped and then they remax on ultra and that gets sniped too. If a terran makes 25 ghosts thats alot of supply that will do shit against for example zerglings. You can tech swtich into like 3 or 4 bls then mass ling bane and deal with the ghost tank army alot better
Also, it's just bad for the game that terran has to significant damage before the late game to have a chance to survive it.
So you would like to play a passive game vs an overexpanding/overdroning zerg and still have a chance lategame? Zerg is a macro race. It's by design their strength if left unchecked.
Terran can play a solid macrogame against zerg without heavy damage at the start. See how Bomber play the match up. If you hit juste before hive tech with a 160/170 supply army of heavily upgrades marine stanks, it doesn't matter that you didn't attack earlier.
The " you need to do damage early " is becoming harder everyday, because zerg learned how to defend a lot of these. ( the 3 tanks push is like totaly obsolete these day for example )
On February 13 2012 01:08 PureBalls wrote: [quote] Did you watch Whitera and HongUn play carriers? Why dont zegling/bling counter carriers?
And no, I havent seen BCs in TvZ even once after beta. I'm aware of the TvT situation, but thats a MU, where balance is a non issue.
Compared to the late game standard play PvZ (almost every game with BL/Inf you will see toss going for Mamaship), ravens are non existent.
Try, fail, try some more!
This is the same argument people used to make about Mech in TvP. "No it really is good, you terrans just don't want to try it" says the Zerg player who's never played terran.
Ravens suck as do Battlecruisers. The reason Terrans don't use them is not because they havn't tried, but because when they did they lost so badly, they realized how stupid that idea was and abandoned it for common sense.
No, you are wrong.
I can tell you this: when after the infestor DPS buff, first BL/Inf build popped up, most of us toss were bitching how imba it was. Sure, the fungal DPS was nerfed somewhat, but on its own, it wouldnt have done anything against the very strong BL/Inf composition. So, the people who were saying, that toss need to "figure it out" were actually right. And toss did figure it out. The solution was found in the least expected place. The mothership.
If someone at that time would have told me, that mothership + archon would one day be toss' standard late game play against zerg, I would have told him, that he's nuts.
And if I recall correctly, many toss have said the same things against air play, you are saying now. "The reason XXX don't use them is not because they havn't tried, but because when they did they lost so badly, they realized how stupid that idea was and abandoned it for common sense."
Think about this.
But you're assuming that because that was true for Protoss, it's true for terran. They're not the same races.
And terrans have tried different things. Thorzain inovated the Thor build way back - Blizzard nurfed it. Morrow with mass early reaper vs Zerg - Blizzard nearly removed the unit Team slayers inovated the blue flame hellion play vs. Zerg - Blizzard nurfed it. Terrans finially started using ghosts vs Toss - Blizzrd nurfed it. Now terrans are innovating with snipe in TvZ late game - Blizzard is about to nurf it.
At some point it's not terrans fault for sticking to their basic compositions, Blizzard is saying "STICK WITH YOUR BASIC COMPOSITIONS"
Actually, what Blizz is saying, is "we are going to keep nerfing you as long as your win % is not 50"
And if you look at the win % graphs, you will see, that in TvP terran had a 60% win rate in 4 months out of 12, and only in 2 out of 12 did they have a below 50%. And in TvZ its basically the same thing.
What this means, is, that the terran race was way to powerful over all these months. Now you are getting used to working with balanced tools.
Those are two different points. The first was regarding terrans not innovating which as shown above is clearly not true, they have innovated plenty. But coincidence or not, a lot of the terran innovations were nurfed. I'm not suggesting they should not have been, but they were examples of innovative play, a lot of innovative play.
The second point is about win rate. And my earlier point still stands. I'm not suggesting Terran should have a 60% win rate, never did. But I still believe there are more quality Terrans in GSL than the other two races, and in a perfectley balanced game I would expect, at least for the time being, that Terran would have a higher win rate at GSL. You're welcome to disagree.
And I do disagree. In fact, I think that all this "terran players are simply better" nonsense comes from the fact, that the race was too powerful all this time, which made it appear as if terran players were better, because they are winning more, while all along they are doing it by abusing overpowered features of the race.
If the Terran race is so overpowered and dominant, how do you explain the lack of terran dominance in Europe and NA. It's only in Korea. Would you suggest that the Zerg and Protoss players are better in NA and Europe, but at the same time claim that isn't the case with terran in Korea?
Moreover, if you analyse Brood War with the same logic, you will come to conclusion that it's deeply imbalanced, after-all majority of champions have been and still are (Flash) terran users. Problem is, when trying to balance around MVP and MMA, is like balancing around Flash, maybe you will get to a point were Flash terran will be balanced, but all other terrans will be royally screwed. And thats the feeling I get from current state in SC2, while MVP and MMA continue to win championship, almost everyone else have almost no chance, for examples just look in foreigner scene.
And that is not, what Blizz is doing.
In fact, in BW, there were only a handful of terran players, who could pull of pimpest plays. And therefore every spectator would immediately recognize, that in fact this is a great player breaking the game, instead of an ordinary player abusing OP stuff.
The difference being, that there are many things in BW only Flash can do. In SC2, there are many things MVP does, and that lead to an undeserved win, which even Code B players can replicate. And such things need to be nerfed.
I literally lol'd when I read this. You're comment is possibly one of the least informed and arrogant of all the bad posts I've read in this thread.
i think ghost change is bs.. terrans play passively because its hard to deal damage to zerg since they can just counter attack so easily.. being able to get ghosts made zergs need to do something.. now snipe will be worthless so terrans will have to end the game asap due to no answer to mass corrupter/broodlord
On February 13 2012 05:22 ZenithM wrote:PvP is very fun to play too, imo more than TvT. It's less complex in the overall strategy but is very micro and tactics oriented.
Yeah man, lets 4 gate into twilight blink into immortals into dark templars. TvT is the best mirror matchup, no need to discuss it further.
Maybe for you. I like PvP out of all mirrors the most..
On February 13 2012 05:22 ZenithM wrote:PvP is very fun to play too, imo more than TvT. It's less complex in the overall strategy but is very micro and tactics oriented.
Yeah man, lets 4 gate into twilight blink into immortals into dark templars. TvT is the best mirror matchup, no need to discuss it further.
Maybe for you. I like PvP out of all mirrors the most..
I prefer watching high level PvP to high level TvT because it's so tense.
On February 13 2012 05:03 Snowbear wrote: If you look at the winrates from terran you see them dropping VERY HARD when the games enters the 20 min mark. Since ghosts are used 99% of the time lategame (after the 20 min mark), blizzard nerfed terran lategame. Meanwhile terran lategame is so so so so so so bad.
Yeah I would love to have access to these statistics after a point in time.
For example,
If Terran wins the game, how often is that game:
>5 minutes >10 minutes >20 minutes >40 minutes
I can only add anecdotal experience as a Rank 2 master, but I win late game TvP, or TvZ at about 20%. I can be way ahead on econ., even if I have a 2nd FE early in a game versus P (as a response to nexus first) and still lose these games. Terran just doesn't have a good mineral dump (zergs = macro hatches, toss = tons of warpgates, cannons). Also, Terran can't replenish their army in the same way as Zerg or Protoss. So if your army dies, most likely, you just lost the game.
Terran has the best mineral dump in the game in the form of macro orbitals, as it frees up supply and you can roll with a 150+ supply army. A way to spend my minerals in the lategame is the least of my worries.
As for gas dumps our options are lacking, ravens are the obvious solution but they simply don't do much.
No, when I say mineral dump, I Don't mean to say another way that Terran can exponentially increase their minerals. But instead, to Spend those minerals in a way that will help them win the game.
Perhaps you misunderstand the functionality of the mineral dump. The idea of the mineral dump is either to create a bunch of defensive structures (cannons, spine crawlers) that solidify/defend position OR a means to reinforce your army (macro hatches, warpgates).
On February 13 2012 05:03 Snowbear wrote: If you look at the winrates from terran you see them dropping VERY HARD when the games enters the 20 min mark. Since ghosts are used 99% of the time lategame (after the 20 min mark), blizzard nerfed terran lategame. Meanwhile terran lategame is so so so so so so bad.
Yeah but Terran early and midgame is so so so so good. They pretty much define the flow of the game. If Terrans can't do enough damage with the tools they have, they have a tough lategame ahead of them. That doesn't seem like a terribly imbalanced thing to me, the race that controls the early flow should have to use that to their advantage to win.
Thats not imbalance, that just bad game design, pure and simple. Let me illustrate, if terran is indeed the one who control course of the game then, ultimately, when terran player reach certain level of skill, it would be impossible to win him with Zerg or Protoss, because he control the game and if he won't make any mistakes he will win 100%. Now lets imagine what is the alternative? Well, the alternative is that, if it is not possible for terran to control the game this way then, when Zerg or Protoss opponent is able to counter every thing terran throw at them till certain point in game, they will win 100% of time, so in this case it's a matter of Protoss or Zerg users reaching certain skill level, after which, they will become literally unbeatable against Terrans. Chose your pick which suits you most, I don't like either alternatives and would prefer game to be balanced at all times, so that all races had fair chances to win early, mid or late game.
At first i thought the snipe change was bad but i guess in the scheme of things it makes sense because ghosts have an autoattack while infestors do not.
Regardless, many people seem to think with the mousescroll trick ghosts will still be able to obliterate broodlords just at a lesser rate than before. Allow me to clear up some things.
Snipe has a cooldown meaning at 25 damage for 25 micro'ing that is almost not even worth it.
Snipe actually has about a 0.5 second cooldown/casttime and the ghost cannot attack/fire during that cooldown
With the new mousescroll wheel trick you can cast a bunch of snipes at once, however its still limited by the ghost snipe cooldown so all it does is it makes all your ghosts fire instantly but still they individually have cooldowns. also ghosts cannot do their normal DPS while chain sniping.
So while chain sniping you are losing your normal DPS, but gaining snipe DPS (assuming you are chaining 25 energy snipes).
So if snipe is made 25 energy for 25 damage, it wouldnt be THAT bad as long as the 0.5 second cooldown on snipe was removed. Not only that, but the 0.5 second cooldown on snipe should not effect the firing rate of ghosts, meaning if you A-MOVE a group of ghosts then hold down the snipe button and use the mousescroll trick, you could literally spam 100 snipes in 2 seconds while also not messing any of the ghosts autoattacks up. I guess if that was possible, the change wouldnt be so bad.
However right now because snipe has like a 0.5 second cooldown AND the fact that you have to consume APM to use it AND the fact that when you use a snipe it RESETS the attack timer of ghosts resulting in less autoattack DPS, when you actually use ghosts to snipe right now you are losing dps from their autoattack damage, and with a 25 damage snipe it probably becomes completely not worth it to even use your APM to cast snipe as each bit of APM you use on snipe actually results in a minuscule amount of extra damage being created when you factor in the lost DPS from ghosts autoattacks.
The above is the main point of this post and something i think should be cleared up.
Blizzard probably already knows about it somewhat but the community doesnt completely know about it and maybe blizzard is just talking about a 25/25 snipe now the same way they talked about NP not working on massive units, but its just a tactic by blizzard to suggest a massive nerf at first and then bring in a lesser nerf in the real patch. That is just speculation, who cares, but regardless maybe there is a small percent chance the balance team isnt completely aware of how the cooldown results in lost ghost DPS meaning casting a 25 damage snipe is almost a non productive use of APM because you lose DPS for almost a miniscule amount generated damage.
So above is the main point of the post, and below is just my opinions on possible solutions.
This is just one possible solution im thinking of. These are just my opinions, and i dont know what solution blizzard will go with im just brainstorming. The MAIN part of this post is just to aware people of the snipe cooldown and how a 25 damage snipe is almost removing the spell completely as its not even worth it to click anymore, this part of the post is just opinions/brainstorming on possible solutions but if you dont like reading that kinda stuff you can just stop reading now if you like.
Okay, now moving onto my opinions.
I think because removing that 0.5 second cooldown on snipe would be hard to do, i think the easiest and simplest way to balance snipe is to make it 125 energy for 125 damage
So in conclusion, I think 1 energy for 1 damage on snipe is not a bad balance move because one 2food ghost can dish out 200 energy for 200 damage and that means 2 ghosts at 4food can instantly destroy a 4food broodlord while still surviving to live another day and regenerate energy and do it again, but 25 damage on snipe is just pitiful and not worth the APM clicks.
So i suggest making snipe 125 energy for 125 damage, or possibly 100 energy for 100 damage. This would allow ghosts to almost 1shot zealots and still with max energy bars ghosts lategame would still do the dirty and kill broodlords/ultras quickly. But at a lesser rate than current.
Lets look at my proposed idea. 3ghosts vs 2 ultralisks, both cost 6food. 4ghosts with max upgrades and energy bars could launch 4 snipes at a ultralisk and deal 500 damage to it, leaving it with 1health to get 1shotted and then launch 2snipes at the other ultra dealing 250 damage leaving it with 250 health remaining and the 6ghosts can autoattack and kill the other one shortly after.
So with my change ghosts would still destroy ultras and broodlords, and but it requires them to regenerate to 125 energy on all of them, and its HARD to produce plenty ghosts, and infestor fungals with mass ling swarms would still #!#@ ghosts, and my change still follows the 1energy for 1damage guideline that blizzard wants to follow.
However, zergs reading the above description may still feel thats overpowered, because they might think "dang, the reason they are nerfing snipe is cuz is kills ultras and broods too well, with your change it almost seems like a buff because 6ghosts will still destroy 2ultras"
And you know what zergs, maybe you are right. Maybe it should be 75 energy for 50 damage. Maybe 150 energy for 125 damage (which would still lead to my scenario happening, but it would cost more energy to do it increasing the reload time). I dont know what exactly the main final solution will be, thats why this part of my post is just my opinions. The main part of this post was explaining how a 25 damage snipe is pretty pointless, and my opinions are just my opinions, so yes zergs maybe your right, i dont know, these are just my opinions and i think brainstorming is a good thing.
Further thoughts. A comparing fungal damage i remember seeing a game where MVP had 30 spread +3 vikings trying to counter broodlords and they were still destroyed by infestors. I forget who he was facing tho. Id say in that game even with good spreads it was normal to deal 300 damage for 75 energy with the fungals on vikings. that is insane. thats 4 damage for 1 energy. One might think fungal is way too good compared to snipe if they compare the two spells.
But I think the balance lies in the fact that multiple infestors cannot really "stack" their damage instantly, while many ghosts can stack their damage instantly with snipe. These two properties of the spells can create a trade off balance between the two spells where they both are strong in different areas but pretty well balanced in the scheme of things.
Based on the spells mechanics and how infestors do DoT damage in a AoE, and snipe is a instant unload of all energy damage instantly, the mechanics seem to suggest infestors are stronger early, but when the terran has a 200food army with a ton of ghosts the "stacking" effect kicks in and ghosts are able to instantly unload all their damage while infestors must "wait" for the DoT spell to finish before turning more energy into more damage. So based on these mechanics blizzard has to come up with some kind of number scheme they feel is fair given the two spells properties and you dont want ghosts to be too powerful in that lategame scenario, possibly only just as powerful as the infestors.
I dont know what numbers blizzard will finalize with, the point of this post was just to aware everyone how 25 damage snipes are pretty worthless. With that said, whatever solution ultimate is reached will probably be a good one so i guess lets just wait and see.
Watch this game between morrow and leenock. I think if snipe was 125 energy for 125 damage, morrow could do the same thing in the game (murdering broodlords with snipe) however it would take less apm to pull off. So once again zergs might think 125 energy for 125 damage is pretty OP, and maybe you are right, whatever numbers are finalized i hope blizzard spends plenty of time trying to come up with the perfect numbers.
On February 13 2012 05:03 Snowbear wrote: If you look at the winrates from terran you see them dropping VERY HARD when the games enters the 20 min mark. Since ghosts are used 99% of the time lategame (after the 20 min mark), blizzard nerfed terran lategame. Meanwhile terran lategame is so so so so so so bad.
Yeah I would love to have access to these statistics after a point in time.
For example,
If Terran wins the game, how often is that game:
>5 minutes >10 minutes >20 minutes >40 minutes
I can only add anecdotal experience as a Rank 2 master, but I win late game TvP, or TvZ at about 20%. I can be way ahead on econ., even if I have a 2nd FE early in a game versus P (as a response to nexus first) and still lose these games. Terran just doesn't have a good mineral dump (zergs = macro hatches, toss = tons of warpgates, cannons). Also, Terran can't replenish their army in the same way as Zerg or Protoss. So if your army dies, most likely, you just lost the game.
Terran has the best mineral dump in the game in the form of macro orbitals, as it frees up supply and you can roll with a 150+ supply army. A way to spend my minerals in the lategame is the least of my worries.
As for gas dumps our options are lacking, ravens are the obvious solution but they simply don't do much.
No, when I say mineral dump, I Don't mean to say another way that Terran can exponentially increase their minerals. But instead, to Spend those minerals in a way that will help them win the game.
Perhaps you misunderstand the functionality of the mineral dump. The idea of the mineral dump is either to create a bunch of defensive structures (cannons, spine crawlers) that solidify/defend position OR a means to reinforce your army (macro hatches, warpgates).
The best mineral dump in the game are marines.
When arguing mineral dumps do we compare the strength of the unit, the cost and ease of dumping, or both? Cause I'd definitely interject that zealots are the best mineral dump to quickly sink 2k minerals within 2 seconds.
I'm a zerg player. Snipe nerf and phoenix buff are overkill imo. Snipe is probably going to be way too ineffective against zerg now and phoenixes are probably going to be way too good against zerg now.
I have to stop reading this thread... It's so scary reading all the terran whine and the bandwaggoning that comes with it. Even the posts that people seem to think have put alot of thought in them are just hidden whine-posts with absolutly no thoughtprocess behind what could be done differently. Not a single fucking one says that there needs be new ways of playing to explore and instead just throw around some hapless TC that they are oh-so-sure wont work just to justify their whine.
It's mindboggeling...
I really hope the crying won't be reason enough to not implement these changes, and I hope this will spur as a inspiration to other Terrans to be innovative when it comes to lategame compositions.
On February 13 2012 05:03 Snowbear wrote: If you look at the winrates from terran you see them dropping VERY HARD when the games enters the 20 min mark. Since ghosts are used 99% of the time lategame (after the 20 min mark), blizzard nerfed terran lategame. Meanwhile terran lategame is so so so so so so bad.
Yeah I would love to have access to these statistics after a point in time.
For example,
If Terran wins the game, how often is that game:
>5 minutes >10 minutes >20 minutes >40 minutes
I can only add anecdotal experience as a Rank 2 master, but I win late game TvP, or TvZ at about 20%. I can be way ahead on econ., even if I have a 2nd FE early in a game versus P (as a response to nexus first) and still lose these games. Terran just doesn't have a good mineral dump (zergs = macro hatches, toss = tons of warpgates, cannons). Also, Terran can't replenish their army in the same way as Zerg or Protoss. So if your army dies, most likely, you just lost the game.
Terran has the best mineral dump in the game in the form of macro orbitals, as it frees up supply and you can roll with a 150+ supply army. A way to spend my minerals in the lategame is the least of my worries.
As for gas dumps our options are lacking, ravens are the obvious solution but they simply don't do much.
No, when I say mineral dump, I Don't mean to say another way that Terran can exponentially increase their minerals. But instead, to Spend those minerals in a way that will help them win the game.
Perhaps you misunderstand the functionality of the mineral dump. The idea of the mineral dump is either to create a bunch of defensive structures (cannons, spine crawlers) that solidify/defend position OR a means to reinforce your army (macro hatches, warpgates).
The best mineral dump in the game are marines.
When arguing mineral dumps do we compare the strength of the unit, the cost and ease of dumping, or both? Cause I'd definitely interject that zealots are the best mineral dump to quickly sink 2k minerals within 2 seconds.
Both, and marines are better. Zealots are melee, so not so useful in many circumstances.
On February 13 2012 07:24 Kyuki wrote: I have to stop reading this thread... It's so scary reading all the terran whine and the bandwaggoning that comes with it. Even the posts that people seem to think have put alot of thought in them are just hidden whine-posts with absolutly no thoughtprocess behind what could be done differently. Not a single fucking one says that there needs be new ways of playing to explore and instead just throw around some hapless TC that they are oh-so-sure wont work just to justify their whine.
It's mindboggeling...
I really hope the crying won't be reason enough to not implement these changes, and I hope this will spur as a inspiration to other Terrans to be innovative when it comes to lategame compositions.
Good ol' “all those who disagree [with me] are only whiners”. Thing is, instead of posting something as useless as you did, how about using real arguments? Care to answer this, for instance?
On February 13 2012 07:21 Adrenaline583 wrote: I'm a zerg player. Snipe nerf and phoenix buff are overkill imo. Snipe is probably going to be way too ineffective against zerg now and phoenixes are probably going to be way too good against zerg now.
are you serious? i highly doubt you're a zerg player for your main.
toss had way too much trouble dealing with mutas. storm was highly effective dealing with them, but it was just too much of a bottleneck they had to go through to kill a zerg. phoenixes were kind of a dead end. a zerg can easily out produce a player going phoenix, and if he actually devotes his resources entirely to phoenix, i just throw down spores and tech switch to mass ling and kill him.
the snipe change was needed. the ghost as it stands now is far too effective at being the terran's swiss army knife. it was ridiculously hard to find a game ending strategy as zerg when they had ghosts. i go infestor. i get EMP'd. i go broodlord. i get sniped to shit. i go ultra. i get sniped to shit. i go muta. i get sniped to shit. i go baneling. they all get 1 shotted to shit. all the while i have to be able to get to my expansions since any of them could get nuked by an invisible unit. can't spine them up either since ghosts outrange them.
sure, there are other strats, and obviously this is bordering theorycraft since zergs aren't just attacking with one unit. but i think it's a bit ridiculous that 1 unit can be so effective against so many units. and i'm glad blizz realized it and made zerg tier 3 pay off a bit more for the investment it takes to get there.
EPT
oh well
