|
On November 13 2012 00:13 WigglingSquid wrote:
While I despise Fungal as a spell independently of the point of view I take, be it design or use or spectator value, I am hoping that they will be more moderate in their approach than they were with snipe and EMP, which were gutted rather than nerfed.
Exactly BECAUSE they nerfed snipe and emp, they should also nerf fungal to the ground. The logic is the following: Snipe was used by a single player in a single game and was nerfed instantly.
So if we follow the same approach, we must nerf fungal and infestor even more, because fungal is used by every zerg player in every matchup.
|
On November 12 2012 07:57 Shinespark wrote:
Speaking of changing the infestor, please change fungal's name to plague, so korean comentators can again go
"PLAGUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU"
PLEASE.
|
On November 13 2012 00:26 sieksdekciw wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 00:13 WigglingSquid wrote:
While I despise Fungal as a spell independently of the point of view I take, be it design or use or spectator value, I am hoping that they will be more moderate in their approach than they were with snipe and EMP, which were gutted rather than nerfed. Exactly BECAUSE they nerfed snipe and emp, they should also nerf fungal to the ground. The logic is the following: Snipe was used by a single player in a single game and was nerfed instantly. So if we follow the same approach, we must nerf fungal and infestor even more, because fungal is used by every zerg player in every matchup.
And then you destroy zergs in general unless you buff something else like the hydra's.
Ghost were used a lot true but they were NOTHING compared to zerg usage of infestors.
|
Italy12248 Posts
You people seem to forget that "nerf" doesn't imply "nerf it to the ground until it's useless" (hello reapers).
You can nerf the infestor to the point where it's still a strong caster that decides games, but not strong enough for the correct choice for any zerg on 3+ bases to always be "sit back and make more infestors. Then make even more infestors".
|
On November 13 2012 00:33 Assirra wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 00:26 sieksdekciw wrote:On November 13 2012 00:13 WigglingSquid wrote:
While I despise Fungal as a spell independently of the point of view I take, be it design or use or spectator value, I am hoping that they will be more moderate in their approach than they were with snipe and EMP, which were gutted rather than nerfed. Exactly BECAUSE they nerfed snipe and emp, they should also nerf fungal to the ground. The logic is the following: Snipe was used by a single player in a single game and was nerfed instantly. So if we follow the same approach, we must nerf fungal and infestor even more, because fungal is used by every zerg player in every matchup. And then you destroy zergs in general unless you buff something else like the hydra's. Ghost were used a lot true but they were NOTHING compared to zerg usage of infestors.
Why would i buff something in exchange of something that was imbalanced? I don't see the point. Zerg has won the last 5 major tournaments, represent 40%+ of the GM population, and are generally regarded now as the EZ race by the community.
Did Blizzard buff something in exchange for the ghost nerfs, or the reaper nerfs? Nope. So zerg should not get anything buffed, only infestor severely nerfed. Then we wait and see zergs actually doing something more than a move + point and click insta cast spell. Remember muta ling? They were fun. And required skill, positioning, multitasking, sense for the game, made everything more dynamic and showed the difference between a good zerg and a bad zerg. In the current situation, in which both Nerchio and Life can beat MVP, how will we know the difference?
|
Can't wait to see the infestor nerfed.
Edit: I'm tired of seeing all of these Zerg players whining that nerfing infestors will break the game for Zerg. I'm sorry, you didn't appreciate the ease of getting three bases thanks to overlord/queen buffs? You need a unit that you can make to fight anything too? Please continue to call marines OP just because they can fight everything too.
|
On November 13 2012 00:33 Assirra wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 00:26 sieksdekciw wrote:On November 13 2012 00:13 WigglingSquid wrote:
While I despise Fungal as a spell independently of the point of view I take, be it design or use or spectator value, I am hoping that they will be more moderate in their approach than they were with snipe and EMP, which were gutted rather than nerfed. Exactly BECAUSE they nerfed snipe and emp, they should also nerf fungal to the ground. The logic is the following: Snipe was used by a single player in a single game and was nerfed instantly. So if we follow the same approach, we must nerf fungal and infestor even more, because fungal is used by every zerg player in every matchup. And then you destroy zergs in general unless you buff something else like the hydra's. Ghost were used a lot true but they were NOTHING compared to zerg usage of infestors.
I disagree. Ling Baneling ultra, with a few hydras or roaches verus archons works very well too. People would need to adapt, true, but isn't that the fun part?
|
On November 13 2012 00:10 sieksdekciw wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 23:54 Big J wrote:On November 12 2012 23:15 sieksdekciw wrote:On November 12 2012 22:58 Yorbon wrote:On November 12 2012 22:41 foxj wrote:On November 12 2012 22:35 Assirra wrote:On November 12 2012 22:31 foxj wrote:
well said ... but not everyone is top tier Korean Terran like Ryung and balance is not only for even people from bronze to GM but also top korean
edit: oh well Ryung played too well =) but it doesnt have any relation to balance discuss i guess :/ Actually if you want a close to balanced game you have to balance for the top. if you make it so lower terrans would win, imagine what Ryung would do. nah i think it was just because Ryung's skill overall better than Curious and DRG. Balanced the game for the top, but then how many people actually could play Terran ? :/ I mean, balance should be fair between two players who has same skill ceiling. And one more thing, few games can't decide the balance ^_^ How do you compare ryung's skill to drg's directly when they never play the same race? Combining that with balance would be running in circles. One way to compare is to let ryung play zerg for a significant number of games, compare the winrates of drg and ryung and then the other way around. But no one will ever do that. Besides, suppose the races are equal (hypothetical situation), but stylistically different. Suppose drg is a very all round player (he will learn all styles very quickly) but ryung is not (he learns only 1 style very quickly). In case of equally balanced races, the favor will always go to drg in my test. the difference between imbalance and stylistic difference cannot be seen. I'm not refuting your point, because i agree. But comparing 2 players' skill without them playing the same race (or even the same style) is not a good measure for balance. The statement 'balance should be fair between 2 players who has the same skill ceiling' is meaningless in an actual balance discussion. It can't be measured. When one race can move and spam a single skill with his spell caster, while the other has to split like crazy constantly, stim, focus fire, and other shenanegans, then one race puts more effort into it. If more effort from one race is used constantly to achieve same result as another, the first race is underpowered and should be buffed, or the second one has to be nerfed so it requires more effort. Simple as that. well, at least the race that amoves and uses a single skill, needs two different units to do so  The most fun part is, that most Terrans and Protoss complain about the Infestor destroying the units that they keep on building en mass, because they are hard to beat without infestors. Well, Infestors beat marines, deal with it. The solution is to stop playing this game Dota-style and start playing it strategy style and use other units. (which I agree, is a late/endgame ZvX problem as well with Infestors; but up to 15mins in the game, Zergs have to use their full arsenal minus hydras, to react to all the stuff Terrans could throw at them) Infestor counter every tech terran has. Infested terrans destroy tank lines, battlecruisers, hellions and thors. Neural parasite makes playing for big units as thors and battlecruisers not viable. Fungal renders vikings, banshees and every air useless, even raven's seeker missile as fungal has 9 range and costs so much less energy that it is not funny. Infestors can burrow, are big and don't take big splash damage and emp.
Simply not true. Infestors don't counter Tanks or Tank/Hellion. That's why you build Broodlords. Broodlords counter those units, Infestors force the Tank/Hellion combo to engage broodlords and fills a variety of jobs against Vikings, loose groups of hellions, banshees and Thors (via IT).
And I'm really sick of this NP arguement vs BCs. 10range Yamato and 6range normal attack vs 7range fungal. Z has to particularily outplay you, to get some use out of NP vs BC. Yes, if you have a stray BC cruising around and hitting a bunch of Infestors, sure the Infestors will NP it with easy. But BCs used in an army or as an army need mass corruptors as reaction, if both players control equally.
Admittetly, usually ITs are enough, just like marines are enough against BCs 90% of the time. Bad luck for airunits that are meant to be used vs ground units, they are completly useless in this game after 15mins - unless you can make them untouchable.
+ Show Spoiler +which you usually can only do with Broodlords, due to their range and due to infestors; banshee, BC, mutalisk, Void Ray and Carrier are all crap, because you can attack them easily and they are simply not costefficient
Broodlords aren't very costefficient either, but you can prevent the opponent from destroying them
On November 13 2012 00:10 sieksdekciw wrote:
The versatility of the infestor is its biggest problem. And don't say derogatory with statements
'start playing it strategy style and use other units', which is very hypocritical since infestor is a non core unit used in EVERY MATCHUP, in every situation. I know you want to defend your race, but community, spectators, commentators, progamers have spoken: infestor is imbalanced.
A core unit is defined by its core usage. So the Infestor is a core unit.
Just like the siege tank is a core unit in TvZ and TvT.
You know, people have (unjustifiedly) complained since the beginning of SC2, that units are pressed too much into roles. Now the Infestor is a spellcaster that is used as a core unit. Immidiatly the same people complain about the fact that it is not role-exclusive.
On November 13 2012 00:10 sieksdekciw wrote:
Marines are a core unit of the terran army, as are lings and zealots for zerg and toss respectively. Why not stop making lings or zlots? Cause they are core units. But you don't see terrans massing ghosts in every matchup, nor you see tosses massing ht's in every matchup. Infestor is useful in every matchup, in every situation. Too useful. Has to be nerfed. Has nothing to do with strategy, micro or anything. It is just too easy to use in every situation, without being difficult in any aspect, while negating fungal and infested terrans requires far more skill than spamming them. Not fair, hence imbalanced.
Zealots aren't core units in PvP and also not a core unit in a lot of ZvP strategies.
Marines are not a core unit in Mech styles. And the post was not about core units, it was about Terrans whining since the beginning of the game about every unit that would force them out of their comfortable marinespam "strategies". Yes, bio should be viable and Infestors are probably OP, but stupid comments like yours about only infestors while half a year ago most Terrans claimed that Mech is not viable at all in high level TvZ.
|
On November 13 2012 01:22 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 00:10 sieksdekciw wrote:On November 12 2012 23:54 Big J wrote:On November 12 2012 23:15 sieksdekciw wrote:On November 12 2012 22:58 Yorbon wrote:On November 12 2012 22:41 foxj wrote:On November 12 2012 22:35 Assirra wrote:On November 12 2012 22:31 foxj wrote:
well said ... but not everyone is top tier Korean Terran like Ryung and balance is not only for even people from bronze to GM but also top korean
edit: oh well Ryung played too well =) but it doesnt have any relation to balance discuss i guess :/ Actually if you want a close to balanced game you have to balance for the top. if you make it so lower terrans would win, imagine what Ryung would do. nah i think it was just because Ryung's skill overall better than Curious and DRG. Balanced the game for the top, but then how many people actually could play Terran ? :/ I mean, balance should be fair between two players who has same skill ceiling. And one more thing, few games can't decide the balance ^_^ How do you compare ryung's skill to drg's directly when they never play the same race? Combining that with balance would be running in circles. One way to compare is to let ryung play zerg for a significant number of games, compare the winrates of drg and ryung and then the other way around. But no one will ever do that. Besides, suppose the races are equal (hypothetical situation), but stylistically different. Suppose drg is a very all round player (he will learn all styles very quickly) but ryung is not (he learns only 1 style very quickly). In case of equally balanced races, the favor will always go to drg in my test. the difference between imbalance and stylistic difference cannot be seen. I'm not refuting your point, because i agree. But comparing 2 players' skill without them playing the same race (or even the same style) is not a good measure for balance. The statement 'balance should be fair between 2 players who has the same skill ceiling' is meaningless in an actual balance discussion. It can't be measured. When one race can move and spam a single skill with his spell caster, while the other has to split like crazy constantly, stim, focus fire, and other shenanegans, then one race puts more effort into it. If more effort from one race is used constantly to achieve same result as another, the first race is underpowered and should be buffed, or the second one has to be nerfed so it requires more effort. Simple as that. well, at least the race that amoves and uses a single skill, needs two different units to do so The most fun part is, that most Terrans and Protoss complain about the Infestor destroying the units that they keep on building en mass, because they are hard to beat without infestors. Well, Infestors beat marines, deal with it. The solution is to stop playing this game Dota-style and start playing it strategy style and use other units. (which I agree, is a late/endgame ZvX problem as well with Infestors; but up to 15mins in the game, Zergs have to use their full arsenal minus hydras, to react to all the stuff Terrans could throw at them) Infestor counter every tech terran has. Infested terrans destroy tank lines, battlecruisers, hellions and thors. Neural parasite makes playing for big units as thors and battlecruisers not viable. Fungal renders vikings, banshees and every air useless, even raven's seeker missile as fungal has 9 range and costs so much less energy that it is not funny. Infestors can burrow, are big and don't take big splash damage and emp. Simply not true. Infestors don't counter Tanks or Tank/Hellion. That's why you build Broodlords. Broodlords counter those units, Infestors force the Tank/Hellion combo to engage broodlords and fills a variety of jobs against Vikings, loose groups of hellions, banshees and Thors (via IT). And I'm really sick of this NP arguement vs BCs. 10range Yamato and 6range normal attack vs 7range fungal. Z has to particularily outplay you, to get some use out of NP vs BC. Yes, if you have a stray BC cruising around and hitting a bunch of Infestors, sure the Infestors will NP it with easy. But BCs used in an army or as an army need mass corruptors as reaction, if both players control equally. Admittetly, usually ITs are enough, just like marines are enough against BCs 90% of the time. Bad luck for airunits that are meant to be used vs ground units, they are completly useless in this game after 15mins - unless you can make them untouchable. + Show Spoiler +which you usually can only do with Broodlords, due to their range and due to infestors; banshee, BC, mutalisk, Void Ray and Carrier are all crap, because you can attack them easily and they are simply not costefficient
Broodlords aren't very costefficient either, but you can prevent the opponent from destroying them
Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 00:10 sieksdekciw wrote:
The versatility of the infestor is its biggest problem. And don't say derogatory with statements
'start playing it strategy style and use other units', which is very hypocritical since infestor is a non core unit used in EVERY MATCHUP, in every situation. I know you want to defend your race, but community, spectators, commentators, progamers have spoken: infestor is imbalanced. A core unit is defined by its core usage. So the Infestor is a core unit. Just like the siege tank is a core unit in TvZ and TvT. You know, people have (unjustifiedly) complained since the beginning of SC2, that units are pressed too much into roles. Now the Infestor is a spellcaster that is used as a core unit. Immidiatly the same people complain about the fact that it is not role-exclusive. Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 00:10 sieksdekciw wrote:
Marines are a core unit of the terran army, as are lings and zealots for zerg and toss respectively. Why not stop making lings or zlots? Cause they are core units. But you don't see terrans massing ghosts in every matchup, nor you see tosses massing ht's in every matchup. Infestor is useful in every matchup, in every situation. Too useful. Has to be nerfed. Has nothing to do with strategy, micro or anything. It is just too easy to use in every situation, without being difficult in any aspect, while negating fungal and infested terrans requires far more skill than spamming them. Not fair, hence imbalanced. Zealots aren't core units in PvP and also not a core unit in a lot of ZvP strategies. Marines are not a core unit in Mech styles. And the post was not about core units, it was about Terrans whining since the beginning of the game about every unit that would force them out of their comfortable marinespam "strategies". Yes, bio should be viable and Infestors are probably OP, but stupid comments like yours about only infestors while half a year ago most Terrans claimed that Mech is not viable at all in high level TvZ.
Fungal is 9 range.
And are you comparing infestor to tank as a core unit? I find that laughable 
Tank:
Good vs marines, zerglings. Can't do anything vs zealots, doesn't shoot up, takes time to siege, is slow and can't retreat. Terrible vs muta, banshee and brood lords.
Infestor
Harras with infestors, cause they are invisible for free.
You can handle big targets with neural parasite.
You can handle small targets with fungal.
You can handle air with fungal.
You can handle air with infested terrans.
So siege tank is a clumsy position retaining unit. Infestor is a mobile versatile harrass position retaining unit, specializing in killing big and small targets and an anti air utility.
Yeah, you are not biased.
|
Thank god. This is perhaps one of the most glaring and longest lived blatant imbalances that has ever occurred in SC2.
I'm glad that the developers are finally stepping up.
|
Northern Ireland27415 Posts
Infestors aren't even the issue, it's the Queen patch that has brought this about.
|
Did MLG release the replay from HerO vs Scarlett game 3 at Dallas 2012 yet?
I've heard this was a prime example of what's wrong in PvZ and specifically with Infestor / Broodlord compositions.
|
It's not too strange that they took such a long time fixing it. The infestor hasn't been changed since 2011* and it's only the last few months it has started to dominate as much as it does. The ghost was nerfed in the mean time, but the infestor/broodlord composition is really strong vs protoss as well.
* http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Infestor
|
On November 13 2012 01:35 sieksdekciw wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 01:22 Big J wrote:On November 13 2012 00:10 sieksdekciw wrote:On November 12 2012 23:54 Big J wrote:On November 12 2012 23:15 sieksdekciw wrote:On November 12 2012 22:58 Yorbon wrote:On November 12 2012 22:41 foxj wrote:On November 12 2012 22:35 Assirra wrote:On November 12 2012 22:31 foxj wrote:
well said ... but not everyone is top tier Korean Terran like Ryung and balance is not only for even people from bronze to GM but also top korean
edit: oh well Ryung played too well =) but it doesnt have any relation to balance discuss i guess :/ Actually if you want a close to balanced game you have to balance for the top. if you make it so lower terrans would win, imagine what Ryung would do. nah i think it was just because Ryung's skill overall better than Curious and DRG. Balanced the game for the top, but then how many people actually could play Terran ? :/ I mean, balance should be fair between two players who has same skill ceiling. And one more thing, few games can't decide the balance ^_^ How do you compare ryung's skill to drg's directly when they never play the same race? Combining that with balance would be running in circles. One way to compare is to let ryung play zerg for a significant number of games, compare the winrates of drg and ryung and then the other way around. But no one will ever do that. Besides, suppose the races are equal (hypothetical situation), but stylistically different. Suppose drg is a very all round player (he will learn all styles very quickly) but ryung is not (he learns only 1 style very quickly). In case of equally balanced races, the favor will always go to drg in my test. the difference between imbalance and stylistic difference cannot be seen. I'm not refuting your point, because i agree. But comparing 2 players' skill without them playing the same race (or even the same style) is not a good measure for balance. The statement 'balance should be fair between 2 players who has the same skill ceiling' is meaningless in an actual balance discussion. It can't be measured. When one race can move and spam a single skill with his spell caster, while the other has to split like crazy constantly, stim, focus fire, and other shenanegans, then one race puts more effort into it. If more effort from one race is used constantly to achieve same result as another, the first race is underpowered and should be buffed, or the second one has to be nerfed so it requires more effort. Simple as that. well, at least the race that amoves and uses a single skill, needs two different units to do so The most fun part is, that most Terrans and Protoss complain about the Infestor destroying the units that they keep on building en mass, because they are hard to beat without infestors. Well, Infestors beat marines, deal with it. The solution is to stop playing this game Dota-style and start playing it strategy style and use other units. (which I agree, is a late/endgame ZvX problem as well with Infestors; but up to 15mins in the game, Zergs have to use their full arsenal minus hydras, to react to all the stuff Terrans could throw at them) Infestor counter every tech terran has. Infested terrans destroy tank lines, battlecruisers, hellions and thors. Neural parasite makes playing for big units as thors and battlecruisers not viable. Fungal renders vikings, banshees and every air useless, even raven's seeker missile as fungal has 9 range and costs so much less energy that it is not funny. Infestors can burrow, are big and don't take big splash damage and emp. Simply not true. Infestors don't counter Tanks or Tank/Hellion. That's why you build Broodlords. Broodlords counter those units, Infestors force the Tank/Hellion combo to engage broodlords and fills a variety of jobs against Vikings, loose groups of hellions, banshees and Thors (via IT). And I'm really sick of this NP arguement vs BCs. 10range Yamato and 6range normal attack vs 7range fungal. Z has to particularily outplay you, to get some use out of NP vs BC. Yes, if you have a stray BC cruising around and hitting a bunch of Infestors, sure the Infestors will NP it with easy. But BCs used in an army or as an army need mass corruptors as reaction, if both players control equally. Admittetly, usually ITs are enough, just like marines are enough against BCs 90% of the time. Bad luck for airunits that are meant to be used vs ground units, they are completly useless in this game after 15mins - unless you can make them untouchable. + Show Spoiler +which you usually can only do with Broodlords, due to their range and due to infestors; banshee, BC, mutalisk, Void Ray and Carrier are all crap, because you can attack them easily and they are simply not costefficient
Broodlords aren't very costefficient either, but you can prevent the opponent from destroying them
On November 13 2012 00:10 sieksdekciw wrote:
The versatility of the infestor is its biggest problem. And don't say derogatory with statements
'start playing it strategy style and use other units', which is very hypocritical since infestor is a non core unit used in EVERY MATCHUP, in every situation. I know you want to defend your race, but community, spectators, commentators, progamers have spoken: infestor is imbalanced. A core unit is defined by its core usage. So the Infestor is a core unit. Just like the siege tank is a core unit in TvZ and TvT. You know, people have (unjustifiedly) complained since the beginning of SC2, that units are pressed too much into roles. Now the Infestor is a spellcaster that is used as a core unit. Immidiatly the same people complain about the fact that it is not role-exclusive. On November 13 2012 00:10 sieksdekciw wrote:
Marines are a core unit of the terran army, as are lings and zealots for zerg and toss respectively. Why not stop making lings or zlots? Cause they are core units. But you don't see terrans massing ghosts in every matchup, nor you see tosses massing ht's in every matchup. Infestor is useful in every matchup, in every situation. Too useful. Has to be nerfed. Has nothing to do with strategy, micro or anything. It is just too easy to use in every situation, without being difficult in any aspect, while negating fungal and infested terrans requires far more skill than spamming them. Not fair, hence imbalanced. Zealots aren't core units in PvP and also not a core unit in a lot of ZvP strategies. Marines are not a core unit in Mech styles. And the post was not about core units, it was about Terrans whining since the beginning of the game about every unit that would force them out of their comfortable marinespam "strategies". Yes, bio should be viable and Infestors are probably OP, but stupid comments like yours about only infestors while half a year ago most Terrans claimed that Mech is not viable at all in high level TvZ. Fungal is 9 range. And are you comparing infestor to tank as a core unit? I find that laughable Tank: Good vs marines, zerglings. Can't do anything vs zealots, doesn't shoot up, takes time to siege, is slow and can't retreat. Terrible vs muta, banshee and brood lords. Infestor Harras with infestors, cause they are invisible for free. You can handle big targets with neural parasite. You can handle small targets with fungal. You can handle air with fungal. You can handle air with infested terrans. So siege tank is a clumsy position retaining unit. Infestor is a mobile versatile harrass position retaining unit, specializing in killing big and small targets and an anti air utility. Yeah, you are not biased.
meant NP (which is 7range), as can clearly been seen if you would read it, instead of just clutchin anything that can help you.
Not gonna go into detail, as you are not answering to what I wrote, as I have already covered a lot of your claims like "you can handle big units with NP".
And yes, tanks are core units. A core unit is not a unit that deals with everything. It's a unit that fulfills a core role, what siege tanks do. But you are even inconsistent in your own argumentation:
"siege tanks are not core units because - list of units - is good against them"
(funny detail, I say Tanks are core units in TvZ and TvT, and part of your argument against that is that they can't kill zealots. You make my day )
one posts earlier, you claim that zealots are core units. Tell me:
can zealots beat roaches, mutalisks, broodlords, Archons, Colossi, Infestors, etc?
|
To be honest, as a Zerg, I would love to see a big nerf on the Infestor but In Heart of The Swarm not in WoL, and that they rebalanced the game around it. In WoL, nerfing the Infestor is by no mean an easy thing to do, because it will affect all three match up, and from mid game to late late game so it'll have an huge impact on the game.
First of all, I do not agree with Terran complaining about the Infestor breaking the ZvT match up. It maybe makes more easy for a zerg to play it than for the terran (if you can define and quantify what easy is...), and it might be more boring as a viewer point of view, but I find that Terran has the tools to fight it with good upgrade, good positioning... etc, and if the Zerg is greedy and rush to hive terran can try to hit a timing attack to kill him or do enough damage so he can't recover. I'm not saying it's easy or fun to play, but it's totally doable and good terran already does it. The real problem with the infestor brood lord to me, is more in ZvP where the only chance for a protoss to win in late game against a
People wanting to nerf the infestor to the ground aren't being objective, I do understand the frustration playing against it, and as I already say, I would love to be able to play other style than this one and there 're some (I like to do a lot of ling/muta for example) but in the end, you always have to fall back into infestor brood lord in late game, unless you all in. It's kinda like saying, Immortal sentry all in is too strong (and, it actually is) so we should nerf the sentry. That would fix this all in, okay, but broke a huge section of the Protoss early to midgame strategy.
What would be the best is for WoL, I guess, to maintain the strenght of the infestor, not to nerf fungal or IT, but make it harder to use so only very good player would be able to use them correctly. For example, reducing the size of the infestor, so it would be more clumped would make them more fragile against siege tank, EMP, collossus... etc while very tip top Zerg would have to alway split their infestor into different group.
|
Do we really want an infestor nerf now? I'm personally sick of them but it's the timing that's crucial.
HOTS will be out eventually. And there's a very cool new unit there called the swarm host. Despite people disliking it, it's essentially a great unit. It's slow, fragile, but very strong when used well. So, yes, it can destroy you but you can outplay someone using it. This leads to good gameplay (unlike being able to fungal things left and right from 9 range before dumping a billion IT's on top of the remaining army).
So, if the infestor nerf comes now, Blizz will probably water down the nerf and buff something in WoL, but this will probably not lead Blizz to tailor the Z midgame around the swarm host. But I would rather prefer good positional play in the TvZ MU instead of a close simile to what we have now in WoL.
|
Northern Ireland27415 Posts
On November 13 2012 01:53 Vanadiel wrote:
To be honest, as a Zerg, I would love to see a big nerf on the Infestor but In Heart of The Swarm not in WoL, and that they rebalanced the game around it. In WoL, nerfing the Infestor is by no mean an easy thing to do, because it will affect all three match up, and from mid game to late late game so it'll have an huge impact on the game.
First of all, I do not agree with Terran complaining about the Infestor breaking the ZvT match up. It maybe makes more easy for a zerg to play it than for the terran (if you can define and quantify what easy is...), and it might be more boring as a viewer point of view, but I find that Terran has the tools to fight it with good upgrade, good positioning... etc, and if the Zerg is greedy and rush to hive terran can try to hit a timing attack to kill him or do enough damage so he can't recover. I'm not saying it's easy or fun to play, but it's totally doable and good terran already does it. The real problem with the infestor brood lord to me, is more in ZvP where the only chance for a protoss to win in late game against a
People wanting to nerf the infestor to the ground aren't being objective, I do understand the frustration playing against it, and as I already say, I would love to be able to play other style than this one and there 're some (I like to do a lot of ling/muta for example) but in the end, you always have to fall back into infestor brood lord in late game, unless you all in. It's kinda like saying, Immortal sentry all in is too strong (and, it actually is) so we should nerf the sentry. That would fix this all in, okay, but broke a huge section of the Protoss early to midgame strategy.
What would be the best is for WoL, I guess, to maintain the strenght of the infestor, not to nerf fungal or IT, but make it harder to use so only very good player would be able to use them correctly. For example, reducing the size of the infestor, so it would be more clumped would make them more fragile against siege tank, EMP, collossus... etc while very tip top Zerg would have to alway split their infestor into different group.
People draw the comparison between the reasons for nerfing the infestors now, with the reasons given at the time for the ghost snipe nerf. I actually think the more apt comparison is with the EMP radius nerf.
As it was, Protoss v Terran was a matchup that was gradually evolving into the relatively stable macro-play that we see today, however as Terrans were getting better at playing a more macro-centric style, their use of heavier ghost counts became more of an issue. Firstly, Protoss relied massively on their sentries to hold chokes against timing pushes, and hence we saw a lot of ghost timing attacks to EMP sentries and stim up ramps to kill Protoss.
The EMP radius change, while it was controversial at the time I feel has in the long run benefited the matchup, and increased the skillset of the players of both sides. While before Terrans could carpet Protoss armies with EMPs, nowadays they have to be more discerning in their placement. The other side of this equation is that Protoss players split their templars better, or put them in prisms. They were trying to do this before the EMP nerf too, but now with the radius nerf they are rewarded more for doing so because it's not as spammable.
I may be somewhat biased in that high level Korean PvT on average gives me the best non-mirror games to watch but I'd like to see a similar approach used in balancing infestors. They should still be potent, like EMP still is against Protoss, but reward good, prudent use of the infestor's spells, not mindless spam from 20 infestors.
|
On November 13 2012 01:54 Ghanburighan wrote:
Do we really want an infestor nerf now? I'm personally sick of them but it's the timing that's crucial.
HOTS will be out eventually. And there's a very cool new unit there called the swarm host. Despite people disliking it, it's essentially a great unit. It's slow, fragile, but very strong when used well. So, yes, it can destroy you but you can outplay someone using it. This leads to good gameplay (unlike being able to fungal things left and right from 9 range before dumping a billion IT's on top of the remaining army).
So, if the infestor nerf comes now, Blizz will probably water down the nerf and buff something in WoL, but this will probably not lead Blizz to tailor the Z midgame around the swarm host. But I would rather prefer good positional play in the TvZ MU instead of a close simile to what we have now in WoL.
infestor swarmhost bl corruptor gogo
|
Italy12248 Posts
That is a very good parallel. And i agree on PvT being the most entertaining non mirror matchup, especially since at the highest level Templar play is favoured and emphasized over Colossus.
|
On November 13 2012 02:20 zhurai wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2012 01:54 Ghanburighan wrote:
Do we really want an infestor nerf now? I'm personally sick of them but it's the timing that's crucial.
HOTS will be out eventually. And there's a very cool new unit there called the swarm host. Despite people disliking it, it's essentially a great unit. It's slow, fragile, but very strong when used well. So, yes, it can destroy you but you can outplay someone using it. This leads to good gameplay (unlike being able to fungal things left and right from 9 range before dumping a billion IT's on top of the remaining army).
So, if the infestor nerf comes now, Blizz will probably water down the nerf and buff something in WoL, but this will probably not lead Blizz to tailor the Z midgame around the swarm host. But I would rather prefer good positional play in the TvZ MU instead of a close simile to what we have now in WoL. infestor swarmhost bl corruptor gogo
I'm fine with that...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
