EPTCall To Action: Balance Testing TvZ. - Page 34
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
| ||
|
furo
Germany449 Posts
On August 09 2012 22:47 sapht wrote: Can't wall on creep! But yeah this probably doesn't work, but it'd be so sick to see autoturrets used to wall vs ling baneling. They're pretty beefy. you cant wall on creep, correct but you forget that you cant put turrets on creep tumors which means, that there will always be gaps for the zerg to come trough | ||
|
achristes
Norway653 Posts
| ||
|
mythandier
United States828 Posts
I still contend that the Raven's cast range/casting cost of HSM and the lack of scalability with auto-turret (late game their damage is mitigated by lack of upgrades) are more than "secondary" problems. During my test games I haven't noticed any increase in viability of the Raven due to the speed increase because: - when used to harass or clear creep with a banshee they still get run down by mutas/corruptor - in battle they still get insta fungaled at 9 range before they can cast anything so I'm forced to throw out a PDD over my units or just let it die without casting anything (or I could HSM the 'in-range' ground units and kill my army) These are low masters games so I guess it's not at the level they're looking to improve TvZ. The creep spread is noticabley easier to slow down though. | ||
|
TrippSC2
United States209 Posts
It doesn't take away the value of queens for defending hellion runbys, but still addresses the legitimate problem with mass queens; tons of creep. As for the Raven buff, Blizzard has probably seen more late game TvZ than I have. Most games I've seen don't incorporate Ravens in any sizable number during late game, but rely on the mobility of Bio + Ghost Nuke to hit where Broodlord/Infestor is not. It'll be interesting to see it play out. I know when I've seen Ravens used, SM owns Broodlord clumps (Sheth vs Thorzain on Metropolis at one of the MLGs comes to mind). | ||
|
Femari
United States2900 Posts
| ||
|
Lukeeze[zR]
Switzerland6838 Posts
Anyway, Blizzard has to have further plans for the ravens because terrans won't be able mass scans versus swarm hosts (and burrowed charging ultras ... just thinking about it makes me rage  ). Like it or not, it will be a remake of "science vessels vs lurkers". | ||
|
The Final Boss
United States1839 Posts
I'm curious why they do not try to make Thors better against Zerg air. Right now Thor damage vs Air is practically nullified if the Zerg gets Air Carapace upgrades, but if you gave their bonus damage vs Light to being against all air units then it might mean that they suddenly can help turn the tide in Viking vs Corrupter wars or help give Terran a less-micro dependant unit that can kill Brood Lords. That buff would not change TvP at all and it might keep more armies on the ground in late game TvT instead of 40 Vikings vs 40 Vikings battles. | ||
|
2stra
Netherlands928 Posts
| ||
|
pmp10
3389 Posts
On August 09 2012 23:10 Lukeeze[zR] wrote: If a lot of terrans try to use the raven, then blizzard will have a good sample size of replays and would be able to adjust the raven correctly if needed. They need to see the raven used by the pros before "really" patching it, going step by step isn't that bad for once. Due to metropolis and atlantis spaceships ravens seen more use recently then for the previous year. Blizzard should have all the data they need on ravens and apparently decided the problem lies in micro difficulties. | ||
|
Strykerz
United States85 Posts
I'm not sure where the outcry of the community claiming raven's were too slow came from? (granted, ravens are/were very slow) but I do believe it's a step in the right direction. *crosses toes* hope this makes something better. | ||
|
cLAN.Anax
United States2847 Posts
I actually don't like where the Raven is going, much as I'd REALLY like to see it used more. Personally, I think it's fine where it's at right now, but the Seeker Missile could do with a change (I'd call for more constant acceleration, like an "inevitable mini-nuke that WILL chase you down" sort of thing, rather than cram the accel. right before it hits). However, I agree that this will make the Raven more viable; just wish Blizzard were a little more... innovative with their changes. | ||
|
eGTFitzChivalry
United States2 Posts
| ||
|
revy
United States1524 Posts
| ||
|
Demorase
136 Posts
They can't really do anything with HSM as it is, they'll probably revamp it completely comes HotS. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
On August 09 2012 23:21 pmp10 wrote: Due to metropolis and atlantis spaceships ravens seen more use recently then for the previous year. Blizzard should have all the data they need on ravens and apparently decided the problem lies in micro difficulties. This is why guys like you don't balance the game. If Blizz was balancing Ravens around the small handful of professional games we've seen them used and only on specific maps that aren't even on the ladder and some tournaments don't even use, it'd be completely irresponsible of them. Thankfully they want to see it widely used more BEFORE they address any of its spells if they do at all. That's the correct albeit slow way of doing things. I'm happy they're taking that approach. | ||
|
Rannasha
Netherlands2398 Posts
On August 09 2012 23:39 eGTFitzChivalry wrote: Why don't they just put this on PTR...? PTR is much more work for a random player to get into. This is just a custom map like any other, so it's quick and easy to try. As long as they're not making fundamental changes that go beyond what can be achieved with the map-editor, they should be fine with the current method of testing things on a custom map. Though it'd be good if there was more than just Antiga to test on. | ||
|
TheRealNanMan
United States1471 Posts
| ||
|
Areon
United States273 Posts
| ||
|
genius_man16
United States749 Posts
"Because ravens are difficult to use, we don’t expect this buff will have more than a small impact on high-level play or any significant impact on balance at most skill levels." How about actually changing some of the spell levels? Like seeker missile speed/cast range/mana cost? Oh right, because "Seeker missile cost or cast range appear to be secondary factors." Man I love Blizzard logic. | ||
| ||
