EPTAn idea I had for Heart of the Swarm is to address zergling speed, which hits pretty quickly and invalidates all early aggression. Blizzard has nerfed stim pack research because terran timings against protoss were too strong, but since terran timings against zerg are too weak, why not add an additional ~40 seconds to zergling speed research? It's not as if it's going to break ZvP in any case and with the queen and the existence of creep you still have enough defensive tools to stop marine pushes that are too insistent. (and maybe a few changes to the reaper to allow for some harassment options)
Call To Action: Balance Testing TvZ. - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7032 Posts
An idea I had for Heart of the Swarm is to address zergling speed, which hits pretty quickly and invalidates all early aggression. Blizzard has nerfed stim pack research because terran timings against protoss were too strong, but since terran timings against zerg are too weak, why not add an additional ~40 seconds to zergling speed research? It's not as if it's going to break ZvP in any case and with the queen and the existence of creep you still have enough defensive tools to stop marine pushes that are too insistent. (and maybe a few changes to the reaper to allow for some harassment options) | ||
|
Scrubwave
Poland1786 Posts
| ||
|
Fragile51
Netherlands15767 Posts
On August 09 2012 05:39 DoeniDon wrote: I don't think the queen buff was done to make it easy for zerg to cover the entire map with creep, it was mainly to "deal" with hellion openings and most early pressure, as well as allowing zergs to get an early third base. Yeah, bang on. Creep spread denial was not the issue they were trying to address. Creep spread right now is something needs some addressing though, the amount of creep a zerg can have out on the map in the 15 minute mark is just staggering. Will be interesting to see how this works out. | ||
Zelniq
United States7166 Posts
also i think this change is pretty reasonable | ||
|
ragz_gt
9172 Posts
On August 09 2012 05:37 Nazeron wrote: raven seems like a decent change, still a bit confused on the creep, it will slow down creep spread but a bunch of queens kind of negate the smaller radius because of the amount of tumors that can be laid But now in order to move 40 radius you need plant new tumor 5 time instead of 4, no matter how many queens you have. So forward movement is reduced by 20%. It is actually pretty huge. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16125 Posts
On August 09 2012 05:39 RenSC2 wrote: They didn't intentionally make it easier for creep to spread across the map. They used the queen buff to plug a gap in zerg's defense, which had the unintended consequence of having a lot of queens with energy to burn and that increased the creep spread greatly. So now they're doing something to tune it down just a bit. Personally, I think slightly reducing the amount of time for creep to recede would be the better choice, but this seems like an okay solution. I like the change to the raven. Subtle changes can really bring attention to an underused unit and can sometimes have some very far reaching consequences. A slight speed bump may be exactly what the raven needed. We'll have to see. Overall, I think a nice balance update for Blizzard if they go through with it. Let's not forget that their first action was not to buff the Queen's range but to buff their starting energy. Buffing creep spread was definitely something they had on their mind. DB specifically mentions protecting creep tumors when talking about his reasoning behind the Queen changes at MLG. | ||
|
cmcaneff5502
United States116 Posts
| ||
|
ragz_gt
9172 Posts
On August 09 2012 05:39 Skytt wrote: 20 ghost end game was so you could faceroll over brood lords and ultras with one unit, not so you could EMP infestors, which should still be done today. It's like saying Infestor is used to fungal, not infested Terran, so make infested Terran double energy cost would not change them. | ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On August 09 2012 05:42 Vindicare605 wrote: Let's not forget that their first action was not to buff the Queen's range but to buff their starting energy. Buffing creep spread was definitely something they had on their mind. DB specifically mentions protecting creep tumors when talking about his reasoning behind the Queen changes at MLG. The increase in queen energy was to allow queens to start with a transfuse to help hold early pressure. | ||
|
-niL
Canada1131 Posts
| ||
|
zhurai
United States5660 Posts
| ||
|
Kamwah
United Kingdom724 Posts
- Zerg's map control is too high with Overlord Spread, Creep Spread and their units are very good at area control. - Creep spread needs to recede faster and that's the only nerf that I think should happen to it. - HSM is useless against Ultras and relying on Ravens against BLs is pretty meh. If there was a good transition then you'd basically see the same as PvZ where a spellcaster decides it all with a few good hits(vortex). It's just my opinion but someones going to start an argument with me for no reason XD | ||
|
Noocta
France12578 Posts
Energy upgrade and HSM upgrade should be the only ones. Durable materials could really be made baseline without any heavy balance problem. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16125 Posts
On August 09 2012 05:44 Whitewing wrote: The increase in queen energy was to allow queens to start with a transfuse to help hold early pressure. That was one potential use but it was also an obvious buff to early creep spread allowing each initial queen to plop down a tumor in addition to a larva inject. I think it was actually the potential for insane transfusions early on that got the idea scrapped more so than the buff it provided to creep spread, although the creep spreading people were doing with it was very ridiculous. Point being, I'm pretty sure that Blizzard knew full well that they were buffing the ability for Zerg to spread creep with their changes and even if they didn't the community told them so often in the feedback threads on b.net. | ||
|
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On August 09 2012 05:43 ragz_gt wrote: It's like saying Infestor is used to fungal, not infested Terran, so make infested Terran double energy cost would not change them. What? I read what you wrote, and that isn't right, it isn't even wrong, just nonsensical. He said that people aren't even trying to make ghosts to deal with the huge amount of infestors zergs are making, despite the fact that it's a great unit for that purpose and very good at it, especially since it also unlocks nukes (which are great). He said that people should make ghosts for the purpose of EMP'ing things and sniping infestors, and that the reason the heavy ghost play left is that people were previously only using them to annihilate broods and ultras and can't do that anymore, so they stopped entirely. He's completely correct on both accounts. People stopped making ghosts not because they are bad at stopping infestors (they're hilariously easy to use for that if you get cloak and take out the overseers, which isn't hard since it has to be poaching forward somewhat, you can even snipe it with the ghosts themselves), but because they aren't an auto-win unit anymore. | ||
|
ragz_gt
9172 Posts
On August 09 2012 05:38 Whitewing wrote: It's still not as hard as people think, and Gumiho was going up to 15-20 ghosts. Even if you can't get free EMPs, you can still snipe every infestor or just snipe the overseers and then cloak and go to town. The terran army can straight up kill broodlord based armies or ultralisk based armies pretty easily if there aren't any infestors to deal with, so focus on negating the infestors. People think that for some reason because snipe was nerfed vs. Broods and Ultras that ghosts are useless in the matchup (snipe was actually buffed vs. infestors), they aren't, they're just an anti-caster unit (and a really good one) rather than an army annihilator. The problem is that infestor is good against everything, and ghost is good against infestor. You can make 20 ghost to counter Zerg infestors, but what happens after infestors die? Terran can handle BL/Ultra army easily when there is no infestors, but that's also without Ghost totally kills the composition/DPS. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16125 Posts
On August 09 2012 05:46 Noocta wrote: I wish they could adress the fact that the Raven has too many upgrades too. Energy upgrade and HSM upgrade should be the only ones. Durable materials could really be made baseline without any heavy balance problem. I also find it to be inconsistent that auto-turrets' damage do not scale with upgrades while Infested Terrans and Broodlings both do. Makes the ability almost totally irrelevant against armor upgrades which every unit should have by the time Ravens hit the field. | ||
|
Saiton
Sweden467 Posts
On August 09 2012 05:45 -niL wrote: I wish the hunter seeker energy was 75 or 100, 125 is too much 100 is an agreeable amount to me. Infestors have upgrade to get their "fun spell" at spawn and HT's have 25 energy to wait before Storm. Great ideas from Blizzard and i look forward to these being driven foward  | ||
|
SolidMoose
United States1240 Posts
On August 09 2012 05:45 Kamwah wrote: I think these changes will be helpful but I also don't think they're going to answer the real problems. - Zerg's map control is too high with Overlord Spread, Creep Spread and their units are very good at area control. - Creep spread needs to recede faster and that's the only nerf that I think should happen to it. - HSM is useless against Ultras and relying on Ravens against BLs is pretty meh. If there was a good transition then you'd basically see the same as PvZ where a spellcaster decides it all with a few good hits(vortex). It's just my opinion but someones going to start an argument with me for no reason XD I don't think terran really needs something special to be good against ultras though, tanks + marauders are fine. Brood lords are more of an issue because simply making vikings is not enough to kill them with infestor + corruptor. So ravens need an improvement there. I agree with the other two points though. | ||
|
ThePlayer33
Australia2378 Posts
just like spells ( storm ), losing 2 radius means a 36% decrease in creep area. damn  | ||
| ||
