EPT[Dec 4] Wings of Liberty Balance patch - Page 42
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Scrubwave
Poland1786 Posts
| ||
|
PanN
United States2828 Posts
On December 06 2012 04:06 Scrubwave wrote: Guy, I'm gonna use simple words so you'll understand. Nerfing range isn't the only way to fix fungal and infestors. There are many, many better ways to do this and I'm not as closed minded as your buddy to think rage is the only way to go. Did you not read the rest of what I posted? Or did you just see that I responded to you and you're assuming that I'm defending the range guy? "Talking about said change, I completely agree with you. Having it as a root is something I never wanted, and I've been playing Z since beta. I don't feel the range nerf is enough of a change, but I also don't care at this moment in time. It's obvious that its a bandaid type patch as said before, and it even implicitly states in the original post that they'll look at nerfing it more when march rolls around." I hope my words were simple enough that you could understand. | ||
|
Cheeseling
Ukraine132 Posts
To answer the question: " At what range would you like fungal to be nerfed until it reaches the point of suiciding infestors i.e. neural?" I think the main thing Terran players in general will be upset about with the fungal range is it still out-ranges the raven's seeker missle. If the seeker missle is supposed to be viable against late-game zerg, the raven needs to actually be able to use it, something that infestors prevent because they are both faster and have longer range. This doesn't mean we should lower the range of fungal to match the raven's (that would be pretty lame, tanks and colossi would eat infestors alive if that were the case.) Rather, we should increase the range of the seeker missle to be higher than that of the infestor (or match it, at the very least!) This change would at least make the Raven a reliable unit, which is something Terran desperately needs in the late game. Good terran players use siege tank focus-fire on infs + pd drone against corrupters. Ultralategame terran army already stronger then blords-infs. With range nerfed fungal, ghosts can handle them in mid-game bio builds. | ||
|
ZenDeX
Philippines2916 Posts
On December 06 2012 04:02 Flannman wrote: In ZvT I am not sure how much change will occur. The range reduction may allow for some ghost usage, but then they only have +1 range advantage. The ghost control would have to be superb. Maybe Blizzard's direction is more ghost usage to counter infestors? I am not sure. Just tuned in DIMAGA's stream a while ago. Zerg now has to put effort in using Infestors instead of mindless IT spamming and chain fungaling. | ||
|
JKM
Denmark419 Posts
- If they nerf the HP of ITs too little they will spawn and kill all and everything in sight; if they nerf them too much they will die before or just after spawning from the eggs. - Infestor casting range is somewhat similar, if they get to close they die to snipe/feedback/focus fire very quickly, rendering them useless bags of energy - but late game when the battle field is filled with broodlings the range reduction have no effect at all, because nobody in their right mind will spend APM killing infestors with broodlings hailing down from 10-15 blords. One effect 8 range instead of 9 might have, is making 3 base colossus pushes much stronger. Currently infestors can hit the edge of a protoss army behind far-range forcefields, but with range lowered to 8 I don't think they can do this - which allows sentries to stay alive longer perhaps casting a second set of forcefields doubling the longevity of the protoss army :o. Blizzard, please deal with the core issue instead of trying to tiptoe around the real issue with these two spells. Z | ||
|
HearthCraft
United States117 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On December 06 2012 03:52 Scrubwave wrote: Yes, I asked him a simple question how -1 range changes anything. The discussion was how this fungal nerf would affect the game, my main concern is tvz and my position is that it won't change a damn thing. The answer I got was "lol dunno you tell me". And another fun fact: I only admitted his concern " you apparently know something no one in this thread is smart enough to figure out." I've seen many zerg apologists say that this nerf is HUGE and will change the game in ways we can't even comprehend but so far no one elaborated how, so sad. Think maybe you and your buddy J can do something about it? Yeah I can. If a group of marines gets fungaled while zerglings stream in (very common situation), it will now get fungaled like 0.25 to 0.5 seconds (don't know the exact number, don't care, just giving an example) later, hence the marines will to 10dps*0.25 or 0.5=2.5 to 5damage more (per marine) before dying. (statistically speaking). This is an example that is true for every situation in which units stream in and fungal is being used as damage support/root and some close combats will inevitably now end in favor of the other player. Every such combat will result in a few extra losses for zerg. Ghosts, Templar have been mentioned, which can now utilize their maximum range more efficiently. Anytime units run towards infestors, the situation is slightly more volatile now than before, which will inevitably lead to more mistakes, hence more infestor losses. Situations like (was it Rain vs Leenock on Ohana? Can't remember...) blink stalkers waiting down a ramp and getting fungaled from above are now harder to pull off and positioning in ways to prevent this is easier. Units with longer range than Fungal (Tanks) will get off an extra shot sometimes. Vikings can be poke slightly more and in stale situations (for example tanks defending vikings, BLs defending Infestors) the Vikings are harder to punish. So yes, it's going to help in nearly every situation against Infestors slightly, certain units (probably ghosts, vikings, mutas, phoenix, dropships) might profit in nice ways from the extra reaction time after spotting infestors and in special situations (cliffs, scrappy situations) it might decide a game. It's not going to break the metagame or something, but it might just add a few % to the winrates and make the game slightly more volatile for lategame zerg. | ||
|
nuogaiyen
United States42 Posts
| ||
|
PanN
United States2828 Posts
On December 06 2012 04:39 nuogaiyen wrote: Looks like destiny is going to have to find something else to do lol Yeah man, these infestor nerfs are really going to hurt his league of legends play immensely. | ||
|
Senros
54 Posts
On December 06 2012 04:39 nuogaiyen wrote: Looks like destiny is going to have to find something else to do lol Destiny doesn't play SC2 anymore. Where have you been? | ||
|
acrimoneyius
United States983 Posts
This isn't about balance anymore, it's about exciting unit interactions. ANTI-MICRO MECHANICS AREN'T FUN. When are they going to learn this? | ||
|
m0ck
4194 Posts
| ||
|
rd
United States2586 Posts
On December 06 2012 04:06 Scrubwave wrote: Guy, I'm gonna use simple words so you'll understand. Nerfing range isn't the only way to fix fungal and infestors. There are many, many better ways to do this and I'm not as closed minded as your buddy to think rage is the only way to go. Problem is there are many ways to nerf fungal and infestors, and all of them are heavily subjective in the scope of an actual fix to the ultimate problem without extreme insight into the game. And with no thorough in-game evaluation over a long period of time consisting of every great mind putting their own weight in, most circumstances this level of insight is generally unobtainable. You should probably stop acting like you know everything. I'm pretty sure you'd never recognize the correct solution as you'd disagree with any that weren't one you advocate anyways: thus materializes the paradox of opinion. On December 06 2012 04:54 acrimoneyius wrote: Nerfing range doesn't fix the problem of the game being way too unforgiving for terran or protoss. Groups of infestors can still root you into place until your shit explodes into a pool of blood while you're face rolling on your keyboard because you can't do anything about it. This isn't about balance anymore, it's about exciting unit interactions. ANTI-MICRO MECHANICS AREN'T FUN. When are they going to learn this? Nerfing range wasn't intended to fix the proposed issue of the game being unforgiving. In no realistic scenario is Blizzard ever going to try and flip the game on it's head months before it's next expansion is out. This is entirely about balance, which is why the patches are focused on it exclusively. It sucks you think theres a problem with the game and that any particularly patch (happens to be this one) isn't addressing it, but it has nothing to do with this patch one way or another. | ||
|
askmc70
United States722 Posts
On December 06 2012 05:00 m0ck wrote: This "anti-micro" idiocy has to stop. The infestor provokes a ton of micro from the terran. You should try microing against stimmed marines. Oh, that's right. You can't. Direct damage is the ultimate anti-micro ability. Not sure if serious.. User was warned for this post | ||
|
jumai
Canada115 Posts
On December 06 2012 01:09 plogamer wrote: Your argument kind of seems to complain that fungal's radius is too big. First world zerg problem. If you trade a couple of infestors against a huge portion of Terran army, you wouldn't be happy with it? Trust me, units are meant to die in SC2. Infestors were not only broken in terms of fungal growth and infested terrans. They also had the best retention of all the spell casters in the game. How many times have you seen ghosts die after they emp/snipe? How many HTs evaporate after they land a couple of feedbacks? And how many times do you see Zergs retain most of their infestors after a big engagement? I knew someone would paraphrase me as "complain[ing] that fungal's radius is too big." For clarity's sake, I've no complaints to make about fungal in general, and obviously I'm aware that a bigger radius is an upside. What I *was* trying to do was answer some of the challenges above asking what difference the -1 range could make and how it could make a difference theoretically. Let me try again. Getting your infestors close enough to an army to use the whole fungal aoe is a lot risker/more easily punished now. The closest part of the aoe is now at range 6, down from 7. So, maximizing fungal damage now necessarily brings the infestor into range of enemies under many additional circumstances (easy example: when targetting units with range 6). Consequently, in addition to suffering more damage, infestors are now more likely to avoid moving within range to use the entire fungal aoe, resulting in less units hit and less damage dealt for many engagements. Units advancing towards infestors now also cross a smaller the zone between "within range of a whole fungal" and "able to shoot the infestors", meaning they more frequently deal damage (by getting into range before a fungal) or avoid it (by having less units inside an early fungal). For marines, this distance shrank by half, and crossing it should now realistically compete with response times (~0.19 clock seconds assuming stim). These sorts of differences have added up into a very pronounced impact on gameplay with almost every similar circumstance, including one involving a spell cast by the same unit and from the same original range. Therefor, seeing a difference from this change seems like an extremely strong likelyhood to me. [disclaimer: I reckon infestors are still good, but also less good, and both of those things sound fine to me. I like that a non-destabilizing change is the first thing we're trying.] | ||
|
Snorkels
United States1015 Posts
disregard, I suck cox Implementation-wise, if Infestors have to be patched I'd have liked to see fungal -rather than a range decrease- have the length of the rooting of the spell tweaked. Currently 4 seconds on everything, this is a variable I'd love to see played with. Root Massive units 1 second, Light units 4 seconds, and all others ("size-not specified", not impacted by psi, mech, armored, flying, etc.) get 2-3 seconds. But then again, I'm just a scrubby-scrub on page 42 theorycrafting so let's just see what Blizzard decides on  | ||
|
TheResidentEvil
United States991 Posts
| ||
|
Ambre
France416 Posts
On December 06 2012 05:26 Snorkels wrote: Sad to see HSM gone but it was quite strong, so let's see what happens. I'm not of the winfestorlolz-crowd, so it should be interesting to see people adjust to this change. Implementation-wise, if Infestors have to be patched I'd have liked to see fungal -rather than a range decrease- have the length of the rooting of the spell tweaked. Currently 4 seconds on everything, this is a variable I'd love to see played with. Root Massive units 1 second, Light units 4 seconds, and all others ("size-not specified", not impacted by psi, mech, armored, flying, etc.) get 2-3 seconds. But then again, I'm just a scrubby-scrub on page 42 theorycrafting so let's just see what Blizzard decides on HSM is not gone. The upgrad for it is gone. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On December 06 2012 05:26 Snorkels wrote: Sad to see HSM gone but it was quite strong, so let's see what happens. I'm not of the winfestorlolz-crowd, so it should be interesting to see people adjust to this change. HSM isn't gone... HSM Upgrade is gone, Ravens now start with it  | ||
|
3xTr4_FragQuenz
36 Posts
-1 Range, so the infestor has to walk 0,4 seconds more to fungal... Health form 100 to 70? When there are 30 infested Terrans, they will spawn no matter what and still doing incredible damage for just ENERGY (more DPS then Marines but almost zero costs) and the raven change. Well if you have the economy to make a raven switch possible without losing right away, then you are also able to afford then upgrade. Thanks for that sham patch/change. So far the results of blizzards hard work are not that great, lets see if they can do a real (and fair) change what really changes something....would be nice | ||
| ||
